# (PC) Casto v. Newsom

> District Court, E.D. California · September 10, 2020

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10021919

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, E.D. California
- **Decided:** September 10, 2020
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10021919

## Opinion text

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 HERSHEL WAYNE CASTO, II, No. 2:19-cv-2209-KJM-EFB P
12 Plaintiff,
13 v. ORDER
14 GAVIN NEWSOM, et al.,
15 Defendants.
16
17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief
18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided
19 by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
20 On July 20, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were
21 served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and
22 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the
23 findings and recommendations.
24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States,
25 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed
26 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law
27 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court
28 /////
1 . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be
2 supported by the record and by the proper analysis.
3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
4 1. The findings and recommendations filed July 20, 2020, are adopted in full;
5 2. Plaintiff’s claims against defendants Joe Lizarraga, J. Clark-Kelso, Diaz, Jerry Brown,
6 Gavin Newsom, Paul Covello, and R. Burton are dismissed without prejudice; and
7 3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial
8 proceedings.
9 DATED: September 9, 2020.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10021919. Public record. Not legal advice.