1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KENNETH HILL, 12 Plaintiff, No. 2:25-cv-1542-TLN-SCR 13 v. 14 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF’S ORDER DEPARTMENT, 15 Defendant. 16

17 Plaintiff Kenneth Hill (“Plaintiff”), a county 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 September 10, 2025, 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 twenty-one (21) days. (ECF No. 11.) This deadline has 23 passed, and no objections have been filed. 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 1 | Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 2 | the record and by the proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations, (ECF No. 11), are adopted in full; 5 2. The case is REMANDED to the Sacramento County Superior Court; and 6 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to CLOSE this case. 7 | Date: October 24, 2025 9 10 TROY L. NUNLEY CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28