Becerra

(PS) Giddens v. Becerra

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 18, 20212:19-cv-01263California355 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RICHARD GIDDENS, No. 2:19-cv-01263-TLN-DB Plaintiff, v. XAVIER BECERRA, in his official ORDER capacity as Attorney General of the State of California; and SOLANO COUNTY, Defendants. 17 Plaintiff Richard Giddens (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding pro se with the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). On December 15, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days after service of the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 26.) The time for filing objections has expired and no party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.