Hilson v. Arnett et al

Filing 53

ORDER Adopting 52 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DENYING Plaintiff's Motion for Law Library Access signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/28/2017. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RASHEED HILSON, SR.

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

No. 1:15-cv-01240-DAD-MJS
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LAW
LIBRARY ACCESS

JESSE ARNETT,
(Doc. Nos. 51, 52.)

15

Defendant.

16
17

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

18

action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States

19

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of this court.

20

On September 11, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and

21

recommendations recommending that plaintiff’s motion for prison law library access, construed

22

as a motion for injunctive relief, be denied. (Doc. No. 52.) In the findings and recommendations

23

the magistrate judge concluded that the court lacks personal jurisdiction to issue such an

24

injunction. However, the magistrate judge also issued an order requesting assistance from the

25

prison’s litigation coordinator with respect to the issue of plaintiff’s access to the law library. The

26

findings and recommendation were served on all parties with notice that any objections thereto

27

were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections to the findings and recommendations have

28

been filed.
1

1

In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a de novo review of

2

this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and

3

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

4

For these reasons:

5

1.

6
7

adopted in full; and
2.

8
9
10

The findings and recommendations filed on September 11, 2017 (Doc. No. 52) are

Plaintiff’s motion for law library access (Doc. No. 51), construed by the court as a
motion for injunctive relief, is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

November 28, 2017
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2