Williams v. Bell et al

Filing 24

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction 10 , 16 , signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 10/25/17. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOHN WESLEY WILLIAMS,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

C. BELL, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16

Case No.: 1:16-cv-01584-AWI-SAB (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION
[ECF Nos. 10, 16]

Plaintiff John Wesley Williams is appearing pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42

17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

U.S.C. § 1983.

19

On June 26, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for a preliminary injunction seeking a court order

20

directing Defendants to provide him proper treatment to treat his “cutting disorder” and to prevent

21

retaliatory denial of such treatment. Defendants filed a response to Plaintiff’s request on August 4,

22

2017.

23

The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

24

636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On August 11, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and

25

Recommendations recommending that Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction be denied. The

26

Findings and Recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any objections

27

were to be filed within thirty days. On August 18, 2017, Plaintiff filed a reply to Defendants’ response

28

to his motion, and on August 21, 2017, Plaintiff filed objections to the Findings and
1

1

Recommendations.

2

In his objections, Plaintiff continues to argue that he is not being provided proper treatment for

3

his “cutting disorder.” While the Court acknowledges Plaintiff’s mental health condition, the record

4

demonstrates that he is being evaluated and treated by mental health staff at Corcoran State Prison.

5

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

6

novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and

7

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

8

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

9

1.

The Findings and Recommendations, filed on August 11, 2017, are adopted in full; and

10

2.

Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction is denied.

11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13

Dated: October 25, 2017

14

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

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