# (PS) Robbins v. Merit Systems Protection Board

> District Court, E.D. California · September 26, 2023

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10055982

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, E.D. California
- **Decided:** September 26, 2023
- **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/10055982

## Opinion text

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 DEANNA ROBBINS, No. 2:21-cv-00621-KJM-DMC
12 Plaintiff,
13 v. ORDER
14 MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION
BOARD,
15
Defendant.
16

17
18 Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action. The matter was referred to a
19 United States Magistrate Judge as provided by Eastern District of California local rules.
20 On August 30, 2023, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations, which
21 were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections within
22 the time specified therein. No objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed.
23 Instead, plaintiff has filed an amended complaint. See First Am. Compl., ECF No. 26.
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 August 30, 2023, are adopted in full.
5 2. Defendant’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 21, is GRANTED.
6 3. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend.
7 4. Plaintiff has already filed a first amended complaint. First Am. Compl., ECF
8 | No. 26 (dated September 9, 2023). Plaintiff may proceed with the first amended complaint as
9 || filed or may file a new amended complaint within 30 days of receiving a copy of this order. If
10 | plaintiff does not timely file a new amended complaint, the first amended complaint as filed on
11 || ECF No. 26 shall be the operative complaint.
12 5. This matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.
13 | DATED: September 25, 2023
14

6 CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10055982. Public record. Not legal advice.