(PC) Driver v. Dept. of the Treasury IRS

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BILLY DRIVER, Jr., No. 2:22-cv-02229 KJM DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER DEPT. OF THE TREASURY, et al., 15 Defendants.

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

20 On March 28, 2023, 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 twenty one days. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

24 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.

3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 28, 2023 (ECF No. 8) are adopted in | full; 6 2. Plaintiffs motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is denied; 7 3. The court finds plaintiff accrued three strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) prior to filing || this action; and 9 4. Within thirty days of the date of this order, plaintiff must pay the $402 filing fee if he || wishes to proceed with this action. If plaintiff fails to pay the filing fee, this case will be | dismissed.

12 | DATED: July 10, 2023.

14 eee 3 CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE