CDCR
Eddie Jones v. California Department of Corrections, et al.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 EDDIE JONES, 12 Plaintiff, No. 2:25-cv-1274-TLN-CKD 13 v. 14 CALIFORNIA DEPT. OF ORDER CORRECTIONS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Eddie Jones (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights 18 action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On September 11, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which 21 were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 22 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. Plaintiff has filed objections to the 23 findings and recommendations. 24 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 25 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 27…