(PC)Elliott v. Lynch

8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Christopher Elliott, No. 2:22-cv-01323-KJM-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER M. Campose, 15 Defendant.

17 Plaintiff Christopher Elliott, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by Eastern District of California local rules.

20 On February 20, 2024, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on the parties, and which contained notice that the parties may file objections within the time specified therein. No objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed.

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, except for the recommendation of dismissal || without leave to amend. Therefore, the court adopts the findings and recommendations with one || modification: the court dismisses the case with leave to amend. Akhtar v. Mesa, 698 F.3d 1202, || 1212 (9th Cir. 2012) (“A district court should not dismiss a pro se complaint without leave to || amend unless ‘it is absolutely clear that the deficiencies of the complaint could not be cured by || amendment.’”). g Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 9 1. The findings and recommendations filed February 20, 2024, ECF No. 34, || are adopted in full.

11 2. Defendant’s request for judicial notice, ECF No. 28, is GRANTED.

12 3. Defendant’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 27, is GRANTED.

13 4. This action is DISMISSED with leave to amend for failure to state a claim | upon which relief can be granted.

15 5. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further | pretrial proceedings consistent with this order.

17 | DATED: April 15, 2024.

CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE