Milam
(PC) Foster v. Milam
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARTIN LEE FOSTER, Case No. 2:24-cv-2307-DJC-JDP (P) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 MILAM, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a former state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights 18 action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United 19 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On December 19, 2024, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and 21 recommendations herein which were served on Plaintiff, and which contained notice 22 to Plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed 23 within fourteen days. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the findings and 24 recommendations. 25 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United 26 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The Magistrate Judge’s conclusions of law 27 are reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) 28 …