1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 Donald M. Bird, No. 2:23-cv-00525 KJM DB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 Rob Bonta, Attorney General State of California, 15 16 Defendant, 17 18 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a 19 United States Magistrate Judge as provided by Local Rule 302(c)(21). 20 On December 21, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 21 were served on all parties, and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 22 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days after service of the findings and 23 recommendations. The time for filing objections has expired, and no party has filed objections to 24 the findings and recommendations. 25 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 26

(9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 27 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey,

(9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 28 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 1 | ....°). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 2 || supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed December 21, 2023 (ECF No. 21) are 5 adopted in full; 6 2. Defendant’s May 1, 2023 motion to dismiss (ECF No. 7) is granted; 7 3. The complaint filed March 20, 2023 (ECF No. 1) is dismissed without leave to amend; 8 | and 9 4. This action is closed. 10 | DATED: March 21, 2024.

12 3 CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

1 2 \bird0525.jo 3

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28