Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Allen v. Rimbach, 1:18-cv-01653-LJO-SAB (PC). (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20190815a63
Filed: Aug. 12, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 12, 2019
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION, AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION [ECF Nos. 30, 33] LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , Chief District Judge . Plaintiff Kevin Allen is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. On July 3, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction be denied. The Findings and Recommendation was served on the pa
More

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION, AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION [ECF Nos. 30, 33]

Plaintiff Kevin Allen is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

On July 3, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction be denied. The Findings and Recommendation was served on the parties and contained notice that objections were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections have been filed and the time to do so has 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 the Findings and Recommendation to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The July 3, 2019, Findings and Recommendation is adopted in full; and 2. Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction 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