Asberry v. Cate et al

Filing 76

ORDER ADOPTING 37 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 09/13/12 and ORDERING that plaintiff's 24 Motion for a court order and 35 motion to be transferred, construed as Motions for injunctive relief, are DENIED. (Benson, A.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TONY ASBERRY,
Plaintiff,

12
13

No. CIV S-11-2462 KJM KJN P

vs.

14

MATTHEW CATE, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

ORDER
/

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action

18

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

19

Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

20

On April 12, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations,

21

which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to

22

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Neither party has filed

23

objections to the findings and recommendations.

24

The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United

25

States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are

26

reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir.
1

1

1983). Having carefully reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to

2

be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

4

1. The findings and recommendations filed April 12, 2012 are adopted in full;

5
6

and
2. Plaintiff’s motion for a court order (Dkt. No. 24) and motion to be transferred

7

(Dkt. No. 35), construed as motions for injunctive relief, are denied.

8

DATED: September 13, 2012.

9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2