Jackson v. Davis, et al.

Filing 16

ORDER ADOPTING 12 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION and Denying Preliminary Injunctive Relief 2 , 8 , 10 , signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/9/16. (Verduzco, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GEORGE JACKSON,

12

No. 1:16-cv-00148-DAD-MJS

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

R. DAVIS, et al.,

15

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
Defendants.

(Doc. Nos. 2, 8, 10)

16
Plaintiff George Jackson, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed

17
18

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on February 2, 2016. The matter was referred

19

to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On February 2, May 9, and June 9, 2016, plaintiff filed motions for preliminary relief, the

20
21

first in the form of a motion for a temporary restraining order and the latter two as motions for

22

preliminary injunction. (Doc. Nos. 2, 8, 10.) On July 7, 2016, the assigned magistrate judge

23

issued findings and recommendations recommending that the motions be denied without

24

prejudice. (Doc. No. 12.) Those findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and

25

contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within thirty days. On August 15,

26

2016, plaintiff filed objections. (Doc. No. 12.)

27

/////

28

/////
1

1

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

2

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including plaintiff’s

3

objections, the court finds that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and

4

by proper analysis.

5

Given the foregoing:

6

1. The findings and recommendations, filed July 7, 2016 (Doc. No. 12), are adopted in

7

full;
2. Plaintiff’s motions seeking preliminary relief (Doc. Nos. 2, 8, 10) are denied without

8
9

prejudice; and

10
11
12

3. The matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 9, 2016
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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