Valadez v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Filing
21
ORDER adopting 20 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS recommending denial of 17 Motion for Injunctive Relief signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 11/30/2017. (Lundstrom, T)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
DANIEL VALADEZ,
12
13
14
15
Plaintiff,
v.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION,
16
Case No. 1:17-cv-00551-LJO-BAM (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING
DENIAL OF MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF
(ECF Nos. 17, 20)
Defendant.
17
18
19
20
Plaintiff Daniel Valadez (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On November 6, 2017, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued Findings and
21
Recommendations that Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief, filed April 19, 2017, be denied,
22
without prejudice. (ECF No. 20.) Those Findings and Recommendations were served on
23
Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14)
24
days after service. (Id. at 2–3.) More than fourteen days have passed and no objections have
25
bene filed.
26
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a
27
de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes that
28
the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper
1
1
analysis.
2
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
3
1.
4
5
The Findings and Recommendations issued on November 6, 2017, (ECF No. 20)
are adopted in full; and
2.
6
Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief, (ECF No. 17) is DENIED without
prejudice.
7
8
9
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____
November 30, 2017
UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?