U.S. Wholesale Outlet & Distribution, Inc. v. US Wholesale
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 U.S. WHOLESALE OUTLET & No. 2:20-cv-2379 KJM AC
DISTRIBUTION, INC.,
12 Plaintiff, ORDER v.
US WHOLESALE,
15 Defendant.
17 On June 23, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 18 served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and 19 recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. ECF No 14. Plaintiff has not filed 20 objections to the findings and recommendations. 21 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 22 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 23 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 24 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 25 . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 26 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 27 ///// 28 ] …