Drolet

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT TAYLOR, No. 2:23-cv-00302-KJM-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 MIRANDA DROLET, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action under 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 19 Eastern District of California local rules. 20 On January 19, 2024, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations, which 21 were served on the parties, and which contained notice that the parties may file objections within 22 the time specified therein. No objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed. 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 de novo by both…