Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01016/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01016-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID ANTHONY FALLON,

Plaintiff, CIV-S-06-1016 RRB GGH PS

vs.

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT,

Defendant. ORDER

__________________________________/

On July 5, 2006, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

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

and recommendations were to be filed within ten days. No objections were filed.

 Accordingly, the court presumes any findings of fact are correct. See Orland v.

United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1999). 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).

The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing,

concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the Proposed Findings and Recommendations in full.

\\\\\

\\\\\

Case 2:06-cv-01016-RRB-EFB Document 9 Filed 02/04/08 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The Proposed Findings and Recommendations filed July 5, 2006, are

ADOPTED; and

2. The complaint is dismissed with prejudice.

DATED: 2/1/2008

/s/ Ralph R. Beistline 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

fallon1016.jo

Case 2:06-cv-01016-RRB-EFB Document 9 Filed 02/04/08 Page 2 of 2