Porter v. Jennings et al

Filing 58

ORDER signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 5/9/2012 adopting 34 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and denying 18 Motion, 28 Motion and 29 Motion. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 SAMUEL KENNETH PORTER, 9 10 CASE NO. 1:10-cv-01811-AWI-DLB PC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. ORDER DENYING MOTIONS 11 JENNINGS, et al., (DOCUMENTS #18, #28, #29, & #34) 12 Defendants. 13 / 14 15 Plaintiff Samuel Kenneth Porter (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se 16 in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 21, 2011, October 7, 2011, and 17 November 4, 2011, Plaintiff filed motions construed as motions for preliminary injunction. Docs. 18 18, 28, 29. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 19 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On December 20, 2011, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations which 21 was served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objection to the Findings 22 and Recommendations was to be filed within twenty-one days. Doc. 34. Plaintiff filed an Objection 23 to the Findings and Recommendations on January 24, 2012. Doc. 38. 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court has conducted a de 25 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 26 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 27 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 28 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed December 20, 2011, is adopted in full; 1 1 2 and 2. Plaintiff’s motions, filed June 21, 2011, October 7, 2011, and November 4, 2011, are 3 denied. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 6 Dated: 0m8i78 May 9, 2012 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?