(PC) Belyew v. Garafalo

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA LISA BELYEW, No. 2:19-cv-0837 KJM DB P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER GARAFALO, et al., 14 Defendants.

16 Plaintiff is a state inmate proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 17 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 18 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

19 On July 29, 2019, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 9.) Plaintiff has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

23 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 24 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.

25 See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”).

27 Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.

1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed July 29, 2019, are adopted in full; 3 2. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is denied and plaintiff shall pay the entire $400.00 in required fees within thirty days or face dismissal of the case; and 5 3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial proceedings.

7 DATED: October 1, 2019.