Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

King v. Villegas, 1:17-cv-00676-AWI-EPG (PC). (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20190227a75 Visitors: 28
Filed: Feb. 26, 2019
Latest Update: Feb. 26, 2019
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (ECF. NOS. 26 & 40) ANTHONY W. ISHII , Senior District Judge . Jerry King ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. This case is proceeding on "Plaintiff's claims for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment against defendants R. Villegas and P. Cruz." (ECF No. 14, p. 2; ECF No. 20, p. 2). Plaintiff's claims stem from an alleged excessiv
More

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (ECF. NOS. 26 & 40)

Jerry King ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case is proceeding on "Plaintiff's claims for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment against defendants R. Villegas and P. Cruz." (ECF No. 14, p. 2; ECF No. 20, p. 2). Plaintiff's claims stem from an alleged excessive force incident that occurred on August 17, 2016. 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 June 4, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion for a preliminary injunction/temporary restraining order ("the Motion"). (ECF No. 26). On November 26, 2018, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered findings and recommendations, recommending that the Motion be denied. (ECF No. 40).

Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and recommendations. The deadline for filing objections has passed, and Plaintiff has not filed objections or otherwise responded to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on November 26, 2018, are ADOPTED in full; and 2. The Motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer