Montiez

(PC) Littleton v. Montiez

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 6, 20232:22-cv-00700California316 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MICHAEL LITTLETON, No. 2:22-cv-0700 KJM KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER MARK MONTIEZ, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, 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 December 1, 2022, the magistrate judge filed 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. On January 17, 2023, plaintiff was reserved with the findings and recommendations at his updated address. 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…

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.