(PC) McCoy v. Torres et al

Filing 38

ORDER ADOPTING Findings and Recommendations 37 and DENYING Motion for TRO or Preliminary Injunction 32 signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/8/2021. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

AARON D. MCCOY,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
D. TORRES, et al.,
Defendants.

No. 1:19-cv-01023-NONE-JLT (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING
MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
ORDER OR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
(Doc. Nos. 32, 37)

16
17

Plaintiff Aaron D. McCoy is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in

18

this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States

19

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

20

On November 23, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge filed findings and

21

recommendations, recommending that plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order or a

22

preliminary injunction (Doc. No. 32) be denied. (Doc. No. 37.) The magistrate judge found that

23

the claims and requested relief which were the subject of plaintiff’s pending motion are unrelated

24

to the claims in his complaint. More specifically, the defendants in this action are correctional

25

officers at Kern Valley State Prison, whereas plaintiff requests an injunction directed at the

26

Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and/or the Warden of Pelican Bay State

27

Prison, where plaintiff is currently incarcerated. (Id. at 2-3.) As a result, the magistrate judge

28

found that the court lacks jurisdiction over the targets of plaintiffs’ motion. (Id. at 2.) The

1

findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and provided him 14 days to file

2

objections thereto. (Id. at 3.) Plaintiff has not filed any objections and the time to do so has

3

passed.

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 file, the court finds the findings and

6

recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

7

Accordingly,

8

1.

9
10

are adopted in full; and,
2.

11
12
13
14

The findings and recommendations issued on November 23, 2020 (Doc. No. 37)

Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction
(Doc. No. 32) is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

January 8, 2021
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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