Godfrey v. Sacramento County Sheriff's Department, 2:19-cv-00861-TLN-KJN. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20191008u24
Visitors: 3
Filed: Oct. 01, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 01, 2019
Summary: ORDER (ECF Nos. 17, 18, 19.) TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . Plaintiff Diane K. Godfrey brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Eastern District of California local rules. On August 9, 2019 the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (
Summary: ORDER (ECF Nos. 17, 18, 19.) TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . Plaintiff Diane K. Godfrey brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Eastern District of California local rules. On August 9, 2019 the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (1..
More
ORDER
(ECF Nos. 17, 18, 19.)
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
Plaintiff Diane K. Godfrey brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Eastern District of California local rules.
On August 9, 2019 the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. (ECF No. 25.) No objections were filed.
Accordingly, 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 reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on August 9, 2019 (ECF No. 25), are adopted in full;
2. Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 17 & 19) are GRANTED;
3. The action is DISMISSED, with prejudice; and
4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
