Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02491/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02491-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 140
Nature of Suit: Negotiable Instruments
Cause of Action: 28:1333 Admiralty

---

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

PETER-VERLYN WOLFE,

Plaintiff, CIV-S-05-2491 DFL EFB PS

vs.

STEPHEN G. PONGRATZ, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

__________________________________/

On September 8, 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 2:05-cv-02491-DFL-EFB Document 19 Filed 10/10/06 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 September 8, 2006, are

ADOPTED; 

2. Defendant Holley’s motion to dismiss is granted; and

3. This action is dismissed as to defendant Holley.

DATED: 10/6/2006

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-02491-DFL-EFB Document 19 Filed 10/10/06 Page 2 of 2