1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 G. DANIEL WALKER, No. 2:21-cv-0364-TLN-AC 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 SECRETARY OF CORRECTIONS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff G. Daniel Walker (“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 September 26, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. (ECF No. 31.) 23 Neither party filed 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 Robbins v. Carey,

(9th Cir. 2007). The Court has reviewed the file and finds 27 the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s 28 analysis. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 31) are adopted in full; 3 2. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 22) is GRANTED; and 4 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment for the defendant and close this 5 | case. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. / | 7 || Date: November 21, 2025 7, 8 TROY L. NUNLEY 9 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28