Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-01540/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-01540-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 999
Nature of Suit: 
Cause of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case

---

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

JEFFREY A. ROSENBERG,

Plaintiff, 2:01-cv-1540-GEB-GGH-PS

vs.

GRAY DAVIS, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

________________________________/

On October 27, 2005, 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).

Case 2:01-cv-01540-GEB-GGH Document 18 Filed 12/20/05 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

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.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The Proposed Findings and Recommendations filed

October 27, 2005, are ADOPTED; and

2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. See

Local Rule 11-110 (E.D. Cal. 1997); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

DATED: December 19, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr. 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge 

Case 2:01-cv-01540-GEB-GGH Document 18 Filed 12/20/05 Page 2 of 2