(PS)Lawson v. Tehama County et al, No. 2:2017cv01276 - Document 67 (E.D. Cal. 2019)
Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 1/25/19 ADOPTING 60 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DENYING 51 Motion to Amend. (Kastilahn, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PS)Lawson v. Tehama County et al Doc. 67 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LEE LAWSON, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:17-cv-01276-TLN-CKD v. ORDER TEHAMA COUNTY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 On December 7, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations (ECF No. 17 18 60), which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the 19 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. (ECF No. 60.) No 20 objections were filed. Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 21 22 United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 23 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 24 1983). 25 The Court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, 26 concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the findings and recommendations in full. Accordingly, 27 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 28 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 60) are ADOPTED. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 2. Plaintiff’s motion to amend the second amended complaint (ECF No. 51) is DENIED. Dated: January 25, 2019 3 4 5 6 Troy L. Nunley United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
