(PS) Nguyen v. Cache Creek Casino Resort

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HUNG M. NGUYEN, No. 2:20-cv-01748-TLN-KJN 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. 14 CACHE CREEK CASINO RESORT,

15 Defendant. 16

17 18 Plaintiff Hung M. Nguyen (“Plaintiff”), who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action. 19 The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) 20 and Local Rule 302. 21 On September 4, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 22 which were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the 23 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. (ECF No. 5.) On 24 September 10, 2020, Plaintiff filed a notice stating he did not object to the findings and 25 recommendations. (ECF No. 6.) 26 Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 27 United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 28 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School…