1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 JOHNATHAN C. RODRIGUEZ, No. 2:20-cv-1650 KJM AC P 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. ORDER 15 RALPH DIAZ, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 19 under

. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided 20 by

(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On October 13, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 22 were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings 23 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. ECF No. 19. Plaintiff has not filed 24 objections to the findings and recommendations. 25 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602

(9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 27 See Robbins v. Carey,

(9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 28 magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”). 1 | Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 2 || the record and by the proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 13, 2021, ECF No. 19, are adopted in 5 | full; and 6 2. The complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim for the reasons set forth in the 7 || April 13, 2020 Screening Order (ECF No. 10). See L.R. 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); 28 U.S.C. 8 | § 1915A. 9 | DATED: December 9, 2021. 10 il ( tied ¢ q_/ CHIEF NT] ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28