(PS) Ward v. Department of Child Protective Services

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL N. WARD, No. 2:19-cv-652-MCE EFB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 DEPARTMENT OF CHILD

PROTECTIVE SERVICES, MEGAN

15 DANIELS, MARINA CHAMBERS, 16 Defendants. 17 18 On September 29, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 19 which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings 20 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections were filed.1 21 Accordingly, the court presumes any findings of fact are correct. See Orland v. United 22 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1999). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 23 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 24 The Court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, 25 concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the proposed Findings and Recommendations in full. 26 1 Although it appears from the file that…