Filed: Mar. 14, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 14, 2012
Summary: ORDER KIMBERLY MUELLER, District Judge. Plaintiffs, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge under Local Rule 72-302(c)(21). On January 17, 2012 and February 17, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, each set of which were served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections to ei
Summary: ORDER KIMBERLY MUELLER, District Judge. Plaintiffs, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge under Local Rule 72-302(c)(21). On January 17, 2012 and February 17, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, each set of which were served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections to eit..
More
ORDER
KIMBERLY MUELLER, District Judge.
Plaintiffs, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge under Local Rule 72-302(c)(21).
On January 17, 2012 and February 17, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, each set of which were served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections to either set of findings and recommendations have been filed.
The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge's conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having carefully reviewed the file, the court finds each set of findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed January 17, 2012, are adopted in full;
2. The findings and recommendations filed February 17, 2012, are adopted in full;
3. Defendant's November 14, 2011 motion for more definite statement (ECF 15) is denied;1 and
4. Plaintiffs' motion for default judgment (ECF 36) is denied.
