Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-00149/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-00149-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Barbara Roberts
Defendant
Jason Scott
Plaintiff

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 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JASON SCOTT, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

BARBARA ROBERTS, Judge, 

Defendant. 

No. 2:20-cv-0149 KJM AC 

ORDER 

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

United States Magistrate Judge as provided by Local Rule 302(c)(21). 

 On March 18, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 

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

recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. ECF No. 5. Plaintiff has not filed 

objections to the findings and recommendations. 

 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the findings and 

recommendations was returned, plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to 

keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service 

of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective. 

 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 

Case 2:20-cv-00149-KJM-AC Document 8 Filed 05/05/20 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 

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. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 18, 2020, are adopted in full; 

 2. This matter is dismissed in its entirety, without leave to amend, and 

 3. This case is closed. 

DATED: May 5, 2020. 

Case 2:20-cv-00149-KJM-AC Document 8 Filed 05/05/20 Page 2 of 2