(PC) Hendrix v. Gomez

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DOMENIQUE HENDRIX, No. 2:21-cv-01062-WBS-EFB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER J. GOMEZ, 15 Defendant.

17 On August 2, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections were filed.

20 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 21 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.

22 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 . . . .”).

24 Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.

26 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 27 1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations filed August 2, 2023 are ADOPTED; 28 and 1 2. The portion of plaintiff's motion appearing at ECF No. 43 seeking a temporary 2 restraining order is DENIED.

3 | Dated: December 21, 2023 dh ble ak “a □ he € 4 WILLIAM B. SHUBB ; UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE