Filed: Apr. 07, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 07, 2019
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 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. On February 4, 2019, 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 w
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 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. On February 4, 2019, 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 we..
More
ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 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.
On February 4, 2019, 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. 120.) Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
On February 4, 2019, the magistrate judge also ordered supplemental briefing from defendant as to the applicability of the All Writs Act with respect to Plaintiff's requests (ECF Nos. 105, 112, and 117) for (1) an order commanding that prison officials not search Plaintiff's legal files outside his presence and that he not be separated from his legal files unless there is a genuine safety concern; and (2) an order commanding that Plaintiff's legal files and work product be returned to him. (ECF No. 120 at 3-4.) Subsequently, the date for trial was continued from April 1, 2019 to January 13, 2020. (ECF No. 134.) At this time, therefore, a court order is not "necessary" for the proper administration of justice, as required by the All Writs Act. See 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a). Plaintiff may make use of the prison's internal administrative grievance process to resolve his requests concerning access to his legal property.
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 February 4, 2019, are adopted in full; and
2. Plaintiff's motions for preliminary injunctive relief seeking an order returning him to CSP-Sac (ECF No. 108) and for assistance in obtaining and protecting his legal property (ECF Nos. 105, 112, and 117) are denied without prejudice.
