Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-03034/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-03034-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1983 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 

1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

STANLEY BURTON, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

LAILA DARBY, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:23-cv-03034 KJM AC (PS) 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a 

United States Magistrate Judge under Local Rule 302(c)(21). 

 On August 9, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 

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

and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. ECF No. 21. Neither party has 

filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 

 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 Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by 

the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 

. . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 

supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 

Case 2:23-cv-03034-KJM-AC Document 22 Filed 12/05/24 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 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

 1. The findings and recommendations filed August 9, 2024, are adopted in full; and 

 2. The motion to dismiss (ECF No. 13) is GRANTED to the limited extent that plaintiff’s 

request for punitive damages is dismissed and the complaint’s prayer for relief is construed as 

seeking damages that are compensatory only, and OTHERWISE DENIED. 

DATED: December 4, 2024. 

Case 2:23-cv-03034-KJM-AC Document 22 Filed 12/05/24 Page 2 of 2