1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALEXANDRA M. CHAPA, No. 2:23-cv-01565-KJM-CKD (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 NATOMAS PARK MASTER ASSOCIATION BOARD OF 15 DIRECTORS, et al., 16 Defendants. 17

18 19 On October 25, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 20 were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 21 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. That period having passed, plaintiff 22 has not objected to the findings and recommendations. 23 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 24

(9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 25 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey,

(9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 26 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 28 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 7) are adopted in full; 3 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice; and 4 3. The clerk of court is directed to CLOSE this case. 5 | DATED: December 20, 2023. CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28