(PC)Brown v. Lelis

8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MARK ANTHONY BROWN, No. 2:20-CV-0885-KJM-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER P. LELIS, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provide by Eastern District of California local rules.

20 On January 24, 2022, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections within the time specified therein. Plaintiff thereafter filed objections on February 9, 2022, seeking an extension of time to file substantive objections. On March 3, 2022, the Magistrate Judge granted Plaintiff a forty-five day extension to file an objection, but no objections to the findings and recommendations have subsequently been filed.

26 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 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....”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be || supported by the record and by the proper analysis.

4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 5 1. The findings and recommendations filed January 24, 2022, are adopted in | full; 7 2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 23, is granted; and 8 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and close this file.

9 || DATED: October 11, 2022.

1 ee CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE