Ransom v. Department of Corrections & Rehabilitations, et al.

Filing 106

ORDER Adopting 85 Findings and Recommendations to Deny 70 Plaintiff's Motion for PLU Status, 71 Temporary Restraining Order, and Preliminary Injunction, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 10/9/15. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BRYAN E. RANSOM,

12
13
14
15

CASE NO. 1: 11-cv-00068-AWI-MJS (PC)

Plaintiff,

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY
PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR PLU
STATUS, TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
ORDER, AND PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION

v.
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
AND REHABILITATION, et al.,
Defendants.

16

(Docs. 70, 71, 85)

17
18
19

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil

20

rights action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. (Docs. 1 & 12.) The matter was

21

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

22

Local Rule 302.

23

On

September

1,

2015,

the

Magistrate

Judge

issued

Findings

and

24

Recommendations (Doc. 85.) to deny Plaintiff’s motion for PLU status and motion for

25

temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. On September 23, 2015, Plaintiff

26

filed objections. (Doc. 97.)

27

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304,

28

the Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the
record and by proper analysis.
Plaintiff argues that his motion should have been construed as a motion for an
extension of time to respond to Defendants’ discovery requests. The Docket reflects that
Plaintiff filed a separate motion for an extension of time, which the Magistrate Judge
granted. (Docs. 98 & 99.) Therefore, Plaintiff’s objections do not raise an issue of law or
fact under the Findings and Recommendations.
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Court adopts the Findings and Recommendations filed on September
1, 2015 (Doc. 85.) in full;
2. Plaintiff’s motion for PLU status (Doc. 70.) is DENIED; and
3. Plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction
(Doc. 71.) is DENIED.

14
15
16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 9, 2015
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2