(PC) Murray v. Holmes et al, No. 2:2021cv00214 - Document 31 (E.D. Cal. 2022)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 7/28/2022 ADOPTING 30 The Findings and Recommendations in full. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to FRCP 41(b). CASE CLOSED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
Download PDF
(PC) Murray v. Holmes et al Doc. 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PAUL CATANO MURRAY, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:21-cv-0214 KJM KJN P v. ORDER B. HOLMES, 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, 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 June 13, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 21 served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party filed objections to the 23 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 June 13, 2022, are adopted in full; and 5 2. This action is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6 41(b). 7 DATED: July 28, 2022. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2