(PC) Wells v. CDCR Employees et al, No. 2:2019cv02625 - Document 18 (E.D. Cal. 2020)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/11/2020 ADOPTING 15 the findings and recommendations filed 4/10/2020 in full; and DISMISSING this action without prejudice. CASE CLOSED. (Becknal, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Wells v. CDCR Employees et al Doc. 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JESSE C. WELLS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:19-cv-2625 KJM CKD P v. ORDER CDCR EMPLOYEES, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 17 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided 19 by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On April 10, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein, which 21 were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has not filed objections to 23 the findings and recommendations. The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 24 25 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 26 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 27 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 28 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 2 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed April 10, 2020 are adopted in full; and 5 2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. 6 DATED: September 11, 2020. 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.
