Lear v. Manasrah

Filing 19

ORDER ADOPTING 11 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER DENYING 7 Motion for TRO and Motion for Preliminary Injunction; ORDER DENYING 8 Motion ;ORDER DENYING AS MOOT 12 REQUEST that Court Transfer His Request for Restraining Order to Sacramento Division, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 05/02/2017. (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RODERICK WILLIAM LEAR,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

A. MANASRAH,

15
16
17
18
19

No. 1:17-cv-00071-DAD-MJS (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING
MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER
Defendants.
(Doc. Nos. 7, 8, 11)
ORDER DENYING AS MOOT REQUEST TO
TRANSFER MOTIONS TO SACRAMENTO
DIVISION
(Doc. No. 12)

20
21

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights

22

action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States

23

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the United States

24

District Court for the Eastern District of California.

25

On February 28, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and

26

recommendations recommending that plaintiff’s requests for a temporary restraining order and

27

preliminary injunction be denied without prejudice to consideration of the same request filed in

28

Lear v. Avila, No. 2:17-cv-00326-EFB. (Doc. No. 11.) On March 13, 2017, plaintiff filed
1

1

objections to the findings and recommendations and requested that his requests for a temporary

2

restraining order and preliminary injunction be transferred to the Sacramento Division of the

3

Eastern District of California. (Doc. No. 12.)

4

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

5

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings

6

and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. To the extent

7

plaintiff seeks to have his requests for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction

8

transferred to the Sacramento Division of this court, that request will be denied as moot since

9

plaintiff’s motions for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction were docketed in

10
11

Case No. 2:17-cv-00326-EFB on April 10, 2017.
Based on the foregoing,

12

1. The court adopts in full the findings and recommendations filed February 28, 2017

13

(Doc. No. 11); and

14

2. Plaintiff’s motions for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction

15

(Doc. Nos. 7, 8) are denied without prejudice to their consideration in Case No.

16

2:17-cv-00326-EFB.

17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 2, 2017
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2