Tetrault

(PS) Austin v. Tetrault

Bad Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 24, 20212:20-cv-00216California337 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 George Austin, No. 2:20-cv-0216 KJM DB PS Plaintiff, v. ORDER Gabrielle Tetrault, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by Local Rule 302(c)(21). On March 24, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days after service of the findings and recommendations. 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)…

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.