Spearman

(PC) Romero v. Spearman

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 6, 20222:18-cv-01590California408 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CHARLES ROMERO, No. 2:18-cv-1590 KJM AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER M.E. SPEARMAN, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, 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 July 13, 2022, 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 fourteen days. ECF No. 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.