Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01338/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01338-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BOBBY DARRELL JOHNSON, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

SHASTA COUNTY, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:14-cv-1338-KJM-EFB 

ORDER 

On December 15, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 

were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 

recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections were filed. 

 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 Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed 

the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 

the proper analysis. 

 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 

1. The Findings and Recommendations filed December 15, 2015, are ADOPTED; and 

///// 

///// 

Case 2:14-cv-01338-KJM-EFB Document 123 Filed 01/07/16 Page 1 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

2

2. The discovery cutoff date of December 18, 2015, is extended for the limited purpose 

of resolving the discovery issue identified in the magistrate judge’s December 15 

findings and recommendations. 

DATED: January 6, 2016 

Case 2:14-cv-01338-KJM-EFB Document 123 Filed 01/07/16 Page 2 of 2