(PS) Noeldner v. United States Government et al, No. 2:2019cv00775 - Document 13 (E.D. Cal. 2020)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 12/4/2020 ADOPTING in FULL 12 Findings and Recommendations. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice. CASE CLOSED(Reader, L)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PS) Noeldner v. United States Government et al Doc. 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 JONATHAN LYNN NOELDNER, ANGELA TEARLE NOELDNER, 13 14 15 16 17 Plaintiffs, No. 2:19-cv-0775 KJM DB PS ORDER v. UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, et al., Defendants. 18 19 Plaintiffs Jonathan Noeldner and Angela Noeldner are proceeding in this action pro se. 20 This matter was referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 21 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On October 2, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and 22 recommendations, which were served on plaintiffs and which contained notice to plaintiffs that 23 any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days after 24 service of the findings and recommendations. The thirty-day period has expired, and plaintiffs 25 have not filed any objections to the findings and recommendations. 26 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 27 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 28 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 2 . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 3 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 5 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 2, 2020 (ECF No. 12) are adopted in 6 7 8 full; and 2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. DATED: December 4, 2020. 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.
