Villery v. Beard, 1:15-cv-00987-DAD-BAM. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20180425892
Visitors: 5
Filed: Apr. 23, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 23, 2018
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY PLAINTIFF'S EMERGENCY MOTION UNDER THE ALL WRITS ACT DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . Plaintiff Jared M. Villery 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 January 24, 2018, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations re
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY PLAINTIFF'S EMERGENCY MOTION UNDER THE ALL WRITS ACT DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . Plaintiff Jared M. Villery 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 January 24, 2018, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations rec..
More
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY PLAINTIFF'S EMERGENCY MOTION UNDER THE ALL WRITS ACT
DALE A. DROZD, District Judge.
Plaintiff Jared M. Villery 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 January 24, 2018, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that plaintiff's emergency motion for an extraordinary writ under the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651, seeking to prevent his transfer to a different institution of confinement, be denied. (Doc. No. 58.) Plaintiff was directed to file any objections to the findings and recommendations within fourteen days. No objections were filed within the time permitted.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, the court has conducted a de novo review of plaintiff's request. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.
Accordingly:
1. The findings and recommendations issued on January 24, 2018 (Doc. No. 58) are adopted in full; and
2. Plaintiff's emergency motion for an extraordinary writ under the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651 (Doc. No. 57) is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
