1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES CARL KELLY, No. 2:23-cv-1422 TLN AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 R. CROSS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff James Carl Kelly (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil 18 rights action seeking relief under

. The matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to

(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On February 21, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which 21 were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 22 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 13). Plaintiff has not filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602

(9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 See Robbins v. Carey,

(9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 27 magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court[.]”). 28 Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 1 | the record and by the proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 13) are ADOPTED in full; 4 2. Plaintiffs applications to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF Nos. 5, 10) are DENIED; 5 3. Within thirty (30) days of the filing of this order, Plaintiff shall pay the entire $405.00 6 in required fees or face dismissal of this case; and 7 4. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial 8 proceedings. 9 | DATED: March 28, 2025 10

12 TROY L. NUNLEY 13 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28