(PC) Dao v. Tabor

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CUONG HUY DAO, No. 2:22-cv-00846-TLN-KJN 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER P. TABOR, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

20 On March 29, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

24 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 25 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.

26 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.

1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 29, 2023, are ADOPTED IN FULL; 3 2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff's failure-to-protect claim (ECF No. 33) is | GRANTED on the grounds that Plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies as to this | claim. Defendants are ordered to file a response to Plaintiff's excessive force claim within thirty | days. A / | DATE: May 10, 2023 ( | 3 “ ! / } Vn) 9 Troy L. Nunley ] United States District Judge