Purtue v. Kearnes et al
Filing
75
ORDER Adopting 41 Findings and Recommendations and Denying 37 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/11/17. (Gonzalez, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
MICHAEL PURTUE,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
No. 1:15-cv-00551-DAD-SAB
v.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION
G. EBERLE, et al.,
15
Defendants.
(Doc. Nos. 37, 41)
16
Plaintiff Michael Purtue is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights
17
18
action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
19
20
§ 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On January 4, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge issued
21
findings and recommendations which were served on the parties and contained notice that
22
objections were to be filed within thirty days. The thirty day period has expired and no objections
23
to the findings and recommendations were filed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the undersigned has
24
25
conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the
26
undersigned concludes the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by
27
proper analysis.
28
/////
1
1
Accordingly,
2
1. The findings and recommendations filed on January 4, 2017 (Doc. No. 41) are adopted
3
4
in full; and
2. Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction filed on December 22, 2016 (Doc. No.
5
37) is denied.
6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
7
Dated:
May 11, 2017
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?