(PS) Jones v. Velocity Technology Solutions

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GARRISON JONES, No. 2:19-cv-02374-KJM-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER VELOCITY TECHNOLOGY

SOLUTIONS,

15 Defendant.

17 On September 9, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff filed objections on September 22, 2022, and defendant filed a response to the objections on October 3, 2022; both filings have been considered by the undersigned. 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 d novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the…