Easmon

(PC) Kjeldergaard v. Easmon

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 21, 20232:22-cv-01283California297 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 NICKOLAS GORDON No. 2:22-cv-01283-WBS-CKD

KJELDERGAARD,

12 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 14 EASMON, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 19 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On October 13, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has not filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 25 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having 27 reviewed the file, the…

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.