Bryant v. Romero et al

Filing 42

ORDER Adopting Findings And Recommendation And Denying Plaintiff's Motion For Preliminary Injunction (ECF Nos. 30 , 34 ), signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 6/12/2015. (Fahrney, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KEVIN D. BRYANT, 12 13 14 Case No. 1:12-cv-02074 LJO DLB PC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION [ECF Nos. 30, 34] v. R. ROMERO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Kevin D. Bryant, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed 18 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on December 26, 2012. The matter was 19 referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local 20 Rule 302. 21 On May 29, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that 22 recommended Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction be DENIED. The Findings and 23 Recommendations were served on all parties and contained notice that any objections were to be 24 filed within thirty (30) days. Over thirty days have passed and no party has filed objections. 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted 26 a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the 27 Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. 28 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1 1 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed May 29, 2015, are ADOPTED in full; and Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction is DENIED. 2 2. IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 4 Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill June 12, 2015 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 5 6 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?