Gibson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DELONE T. JOHNSON, No. 2:23–cv–00344-KJM–CKD PS Plaintiff, ORDER

v.

DANIEL GIBSON, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se and in forma pauperis. The matter was referred 17 to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by Local Rule 302(c). 18 On September 26, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 19 contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be 20 filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has not filed objections. The court has reviewed the file and 21 finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate 22 judge’s analysis. 23 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 24 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 25 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 26 by the magistrate judge are reviewed…