Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-03102/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-03102-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Alex Leonard Azevedo
Plaintiff
Anne Walton
Defendant

Document Text:

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALEX LEONARD AZEVEDO,

Plaintiff,

v.

ANNE WALTON,

Defendant.

No. 2:24-cv-3102-TLN-CSK 

ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action seeking relief 

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On November 15, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which 

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

recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff 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, including the objections, the Court finds the findings and 

Case 2:24-cv-03102-TLN-CSK Document 9 Filed 12/16/24 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

recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.

The Court notes that in his objections, Plaintiff claims he has not been “contacted” or 

provided a case number for his previously filed case, Azevedo v. Nelson, No. 2:24-cv-2995-AC-P

(E.D. Cal.). (ECF No. 8 at 1–2.) However, a review of the court docket in No. 2:24-cv-2995-

AC-P reflects Plaintiff was informed of the opening of his prior action when the Clerk of the 

Court issued new case documents and a litigant letter to Plaintiff on November 1, 2024. Prisoner 

New Case Documents and Order, Azevedo v. Nelson, No. 2:24-cv-2995-AC-P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 

2024), ECF No. 3. 1 In addition, on November 5, 2024, in response to Plaintiff’s request for 

status of his case filings, Plaintiff was sent a list of his open cases. Status Request, Azevedo v. 

Nelson, No. 2:24-cv-2995-AC-P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 4, 2024), ECF No. 5. However, because 

Plaintiff now claims he has not received any documents identifying his prior case, the Clerk of the 

Court is directed to send Plaintiff a copy of the following documents filed in No. 2:24-cv-2995-

AC-P: Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 1) and the new case opening documents served on 

November 1, 2024 (ECF No. 3). 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations, (ECF No. 5), are ADOPTED in full;

2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice; and

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff a copy of the following documents

filed in Azevedo v. Nelson, No. 2:24-cv-2995-AC-P (E.D. Cal.): Plaintiff’s Complaint

(ECF No. 1) and the new case opening documents served on November 1, 2024 (ECF

No. 3).

Date: December 13, 2024 

1

 A court may take judicial notice of court records. See MGIC Indem. Co. v. Weisman, 803 F.2d 

500, 505 (9th Cir. 1986); United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119 (9th Cir. 1980).

___________________________________ 

TROY L. NUNLEY

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:24-cv-03102-TLN-CSK Document 9 Filed 12/16/24 Page 2 of 2