Thomas

(PC) Dunsmore v. Thomas

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 26, 20232:17-cv-02355California325 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DARRYL DUNSMORE, No. 2:17-cv-02355 KJM AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER M. THOMAS, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis is represented by counsel. He 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 August 11, 2023, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, which were served on all parties, and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. ECF No. 32. Neither party has 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…

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.