Asberry v. Biter

Filing 101

ORDER Adopting 82 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DISMISSING Various 67 71 75 Motions for Injunctive Relief signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/21/2018. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TONY ASBERRY,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
C. RELEVANTE, et al.,

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING
VARIOUS MOTIONS FOR INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF

Defendants.
(Doc. Nos. 67, 71, 75, 82)

16
17

No. 1:16-cv-01741-DAD-MJS

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 the United States

20

District Court for the Eastern District of California.

21

Plaintiff has filed numerous motions that may fairly be characterized as requests for

22

various forms of injunctive relief. (See Doc. Nos. 67, 71, 75.) On December 27, 2017, the

23

assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending these motions,

24

which sought relief such as an order that plaintiff be allowed access to the law library, that he be

25

given access to his legal papers, and that a legal assistant and legal counsel be appointed for him,

26

be denied. (Doc. No. 82.) The findings and recommendations permitted all parties to file

27

objections thereto within fourteen days of their issuance. No objections have been filed and the

28

time in which to do so has since passed.
1

1

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

2

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

3

undersigned concludes the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by

4

proper analysis.

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Given the foregoing:
1. The findings and recommendations issued December 27, 2017 (Doc. No. 82) are adopted
in full;
2. Plaintiff’s motions for a court order requiring that he be provided: access to the law
library (Doc. No. 67); access to his legal papers (Doc. No. 71); and access to his legal or
medical files (Doc. No. 75) are denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

February 21, 2018
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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