Alvaro Quezada v. N. McDowell

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WESTERN DIVISION

5 6 ALVARO QUEZADA, No. ED CV 18-00251-VBF-MAA Plaintiff,

ORDER

v. Overruling Plaintiff’s Objections; Adopting Report & Recommendation; 10 tru o C tc irtsiD se ta tS a in ro fila C fo tc irtsiD 1 111 2 431

tN

hi. s M

cP auc sD r es ,O u ta hW n et E

atL o p pL

2 l 8 ie c t U a Da b.l lSe. e, f .

Ce lan . w d §a , n 6 at 3 ns 6 d. ( tb h) e( w), eth llD [ e -D r e C eon aocy s u oi #n r n t2g

eh7 dD a] s Re f r ee e pn v od i rea twn at es nd’ d M

tho et i ro en c oto rd D s i is nm

iss d e tin U la rtn e C 11

Recommendation (“R&R”) of the United States Magistrate Judge. As required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), the Court has engaged in de novo review of the 17 portions of the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) to which plaintiff has 18 specifically objected and finds no defect of law, fact, or logic in the R&R. The 19 Court finds discussion of the objections to be unnecessary on this record. “The 20 Magistrates Act ‘merely requires the district judge to make a de novo 21 determination of those…