Howard v. Hildebrand et al

Filing 15

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, and DENYING Plaintiff's Motion for Access to Law Library 8 , 9 , signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 5/4/2018. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
ISRAEL HOWARD,

No. 1:17-cv-01397-LJO-SAB (PC)

10
Plaintiff,

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, AND DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ACCESS TO
LAW LIBRARY

11
v.
12
M. HILDEBRAND, et al.,
13

(Doc. Nos. 8, 9)

Defendants.
14
15
16

Plaintiff Israel Howard is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this

17 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to the assigned
18 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the United States
19 District Court for the Eastern District of California.
20

On December 6, 2017, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations

21 recommending that plaintiff’s motion for an order directing that he be provided law library
22 access, (Doc. No. 8), be denied, (Doc. No. 9). Plaintiff’s objections to those findings and
23 recommendations were due within thirty (30) days. (Doc. No. 9, at 3.) The deadline has passed,
24 and no objections were filed.
25

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

26 conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the
27 undersigned concludes that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and
28 by proper analysis.

1

1

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. The findings and recommendations issued on December 6, 2017 (Doc. No. 9) are

3
4

adopted in full; and
2. Plaintiff’s motion for an order directing that he be provided law library access (Doc.
No. 8 ) is denied.

5
6

7 IT IS SO ORDERED.
8
9

Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____

May 4, 2018

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