Jackson v. Bick, 2:15-cv-2066 WBS DB P. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20180426974
Visitors: 14
Filed: Apr. 25, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 25, 2018
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB , District Judge . Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. By order dated March 19, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB , District Judge . Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. By order dated March 19, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and ..
More
ORDER
WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
By order dated March 19, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 48.) Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The undersigned previously adopted the findings and recommendations granting defendant Seabrooks' motion to dismiss. (See ECF No. 50.)
The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed March 19, 2018 (ECF No. 48), are adopted in full;
2. Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction (ECF No. 46) is denied; and
3. Plaintiff's request for a stay (ECF No. 46) is denied.
Source: Leagle
