1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 2:22-cv-00117-TLN-JDP 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 APPROXIMATELY $77,700 IN U.S.

CURRENCY,

15 Defendant. 16

17 18 This is a forfeiture action brought by the United States. It was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to the Court’s Local Rules. 20 On May 1, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 21 contained notice to the parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be 22 filed within fourteen days. No objections were filed. 23 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 24 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 25 See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 26 magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”). 27 Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 28 the record and by the proper analysis. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations filed May 1, 2023, are ADOPTED; 3 2. Printis Morrissette and Kao Saechao are held in default; 4 3. That the United States’ motion for default judgment and final judgment of forfeiture 5 | (ECF No. 16) is GRANTED; 6 4. Judgment by default is hereby entered against any right, title, or interests of Printis 7 | Morrissette and Kao Saechao in the defendant currency referenced in the above caption; 8 5. Final judgment of forfeiture is hereby entered, forfeiting all right, title, and interest in 9 | the defendant currency to the United States, to be disposed of according to law; and 10 6. All parties shall bear their own costs and attorney’s fees. 11 || Date: June 12, 2023 12 /) ff 14 “\ Ag } ai

15 Troy L. Nunley . } United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28