Burton v. McDonald, et al
Filing
37
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 10/4/11 ORDERING 30 Findings and Recommendations are adopted in full; and 26 Motion for Injunctive relief is denied.(Matson, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
HARRISON L. BURTON,
11
12
13
14
Plaintiff,
vs.
WARDEN McDONALD, et al.,
Defendants.
15
16
No. 2:10-cv-1980 JAM JFM (PC)
ORDER
/
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action
17
seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate
18
Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
19
On July 5, 2011, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein
20
which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the
21
findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed
22
objections to the findings and recommendations.
23
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule
24
304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire
25
file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by
26
proper analysis.
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1. The findings and recommendations filed July 5, 2011, are adopted in full; and
3
2. Plaintiff’s June 9, 2011 motion for injunctive relief is denied.
4
DATED: October 4, 2011
5
/s/ John A. Mendez
U. S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
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?