Mitchell v. Davey, et al.

Filing 171

ORDER ADOPTING 169 Findings and Recommendations and DENYING 156 Plaintiff's Motion for Injunctive Relief Under the All Writs Act signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 8/3/2020. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOHN E. MITCHELL,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 1:16-cv-01148-DAD-EPG (PC)

v.
CRM M.S. ROBICHEAUX,

15

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF UNDER THE ALL WRITS ACT

Defendant.
(Doc. Nos. 156, 169)

16
17
18

Plaintiff John E. Mitchell is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights action

19

filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge

20

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On June 9, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations,

21
22

recommending that plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief under the All Writs Act be denied

23

without prejudice. (Doc. No. 169 at 3.) The findings and recommendations were served on both

24

parties and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within twenty-one (21)

25

days of service. (Id.) No objections have been filed, and the time to do so has now passed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, the

26
27

court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

28

/////
1

1

court concludes that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper

2

analysis.

3

Accordingly:

4

1.

5

adopted in full; and

6

2.

Plaintiff’s motion for an order under the All Writs Act (Doc. No. 159) is denied
without prejudice.1

7
8

The findings and recommendations issued on June 9, 2020 (Doc. No. 169) are

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9

Dated:

August 3, 2020
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

As the magistrate judge noted, if plaintiff requires an extension of any deadline due to lack of
access to his legal property or the law library, he may file a motion seeking an extension of time.
(Doc. No. 169 at 3.) Additionally, if this case proceeds to trial and plaintiff still believes he is
being denied adequate access to his legal property or the law library, plaintiff may renew this
motion for injunctive relief. (Id.)
2