Winkfield

(PC) Belmonte v. Winkfield

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 31, 20212:19-cv-01189California355 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MIGUEL BELMONTE, No. 2:19-cv-1189 KJM AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER WINKFIELD, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On August 25 and September 17, 2020, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. (ECF Nos. 24, 25). Plaintiff has not 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 of law are reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143,…

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.