Torres v. Patel, 1:18-cv-00188-LJO-SAB (PC). (2020)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20200107965
Visitors: 12
Filed: Jan. 04, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 04, 2020
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION, AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (ECF Nos. 34, 41) LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , Chief District Judge . Plaintiff Miguel Torres is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. This 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 25, 2019, the assign
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION, AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (ECF Nos. 34, 41) LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , Chief District Judge . Plaintiff Miguel Torres is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. This 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 25, 2019, the assigne..
More
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION, AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
(ECF Nos. 34, 41)
LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, Chief District Judge.
Plaintiff Miguel Torres is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This 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 25, 2019, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendation recommending that Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction be denied. (ECF No. 41.) The findings and recommendation were served on the parties and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within twenty-one (21) days after service. (Id. at 7.) No objections have been filed and the time in which to do so has now passed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendation issued on November 25, 2019, (ECF No. 41), are adopted in full;
2. Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction, (ECF No. 34), is DENIED; and
3. This action is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
