LEE v. WAGNER, 1:05-cv-00802-LJO-BAM PC. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20120418a04
Visitors: 7
Filed: Apr. 17, 2012
Latest Update: Apr. 17, 2012
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A COURT ORDER (ECF Nos. 71, 73) LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge. Plaintiff Bobby Lee ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff's second amended complaint, filed June 1, 2009, against Defendant Wagner for deliberate indifference to medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Th
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A COURT ORDER (ECF Nos. 71, 73) LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge. Plaintiff Bobby Lee ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff's second amended complaint, filed June 1, 2009, against Defendant Wagner for deliberate indifference to medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The..
More
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A COURT ORDER
(ECF Nos. 71, 73)
LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge.
Plaintiff Bobby Lee ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff's second amended complaint, filed June 1, 2009, against Defendant Wagner for deliberate indifference to medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the issuance of a court order to be transferred to a different prison. (ECF No. 71.) On February 28, 2012, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein which was served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. (ECF No. 73.) More than thirty days have passed and no objections have been filed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), 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 by proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations, filed February 28, 2012, is adopted in full; and
2. Plaintiff's motion for a court order, filed February 27, 2012, is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
