Asberry v. Biter

Filing 77

ORDER adopting FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and denying Motions for a Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction and Court Orders 20 , 24 , 42 , 59 , 62 , 64 , 68 signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/2/2017. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
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 16 No. 16-cv-01741-DAD-MJS Plaintiff, v. C. RELEVANTE, et al., Defendants. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING MOTIONS FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, AND COURT ORDERS (Doc. Nos. 20, 24, 42, 59, 62, 64, 68) 17 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 19 action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States 20 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 Plaintiff has filed numerous motions that may be characterized as requests for various 22 forms or for injunctive relief. (Doc. Nos. 20, 24, 42, 59.) On September 12, 2017, the assigned 23 magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that plaintiff’s motion for 24 a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction be denied. (Doc. No. 62.) Plaintiff was 25 provided fourteen days to file objections to those findings and recommendations. (Id.) Although 26 untimely, plaintiff did so on October 10, 2017. (Doc. No. 70.) 27 28 Also, on September 12, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that plaintiff’s motion for a court order directing non-parties to 1 1 allow plaintiff access to his medical file be denied. (Doc. No. 64.) Plaintiff was provided 2 fourteen days to file objections to those findings and recommendations. (Id.) Plaintiff did so on 3 September 26, 2017. (Doc. No. 69.) 4 On September 20, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 5 recommendations recommending that plaintiff’s motion for a court order directing non-parties to 6 assist him with discovery and prison law library access be denied. (Doc. No. 68.) Plaintiff was 7 provided fourteen days to file objections to those findings and recommendations. (Id.) To date, 8 plaintiff has filed no objections to those findings and recommendations, and the time for doing so 9 has passed. 10 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a 11 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including plaintiff’s 12 objections, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and 13 by proper analysis. 14 The court finds plaintiff’s objections to lack merit. Regarding plaintiff’s objections to the 15 September 12, 2017 findings and recommendations (Doc. No. 70), the court agrees with the 16 assigned magistrate judge that plaintiff seeks injunctive relief against individuals who are not 17 parties to the present lawsuit. This action is one brought against individuals employed at Kern 18 Valley State Prison. However plaintiff in his motion seeks an injunction against individuals 19 employed at R.J. Donovan Correctional Facility, where plaintiff is now housed. To the extent 20 plaintiff seeks to enjoin these non-parties, he must do so by pursuing a separate action. Plaintiff’s 21 objections to the September 12, 2017 findings and recommendations (Doc. No. 69) suffer the 22 same deficiency. 23 For these reasons: 24 1. 25 The findings and recommendations filed September 12, 2017 (Docs. 62, 64) and September 20, 2017 (Doc. 68) are adopted in full; 26 2. Plaintiff’s motions for court orders (Docs. 20, 24) are denied; 27 3. Plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction (Doc. 28 42) is denied; and 2 1 4. 2 3 4 Plaintiff’s “Motion to have meaningful access to court to conduct discovery” (Doc. 59) is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: December 2, 2017 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?