Ackley v. Carroll et al

Filing 86

ORDER adopting 65 , 80 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 1/24/2012. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

DONALD J. ACKLEY,

10
11
12

CASE NO. 1:06-cv-00771-AWI-BAM PC

Plaintiff,

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF (ECF Nos. 65, 80)

v.
D. CARROLL, et al.,

13

Defendants.
/

14
15

Plaintiff Donald J. Ackley (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

16

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, filed this action on June 19, 2006.

17

The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)

18

and Local Rule 302.

19

Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the issuance of a preliminary injunction mandating the return

20

of his legal property or that the property be protected on September 9, 2011. (ECF No. 67.) On

21

September 28, 2011, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations recommending the

22

motion be denied and informing the parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations

23

were to be filed within thirty days. (ECF No. 65.) On November 8, 2011, Plaintiff filed a notice of

24

change of address in which he seeks an injunction directing that all his personal property be

25

transported to the new prison.

26

recommendations issued recommending denial of the motion and again informing the parties that

27

objections were to be filed within thirty days. More than thirty days have passed and no objections

28

have been filed.

(ECF No. 78).

1

On December 13, 2011, a findings and

1

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a

2

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings

3

and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

4

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

5

1.

6
7

adopted in full; and
2.

8
9

The findings and recommendations, filed September 28 and December 13, 2011, are

Plaintiff’s motions for injunctive relief filed September 9 and December 8, 2011, are
DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

10
11

Dated:
0m8i78

January 24, 2012
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2