Saechao

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MEY SAECHAO, No. 2:19-cv-1723 KJM DB Plaintiff, v. ORDER PRIME RECOVERY LLC a/k/a PRIME

RECOVERY SOLUTIONS,

15 Defendant. 17 The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by Local Rule 302(c)(19). On May 26, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on plaintiff 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. 13. The thirty-day period has expired, and plaintiff has not filed any 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 of law are reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate…