Tunstall v. Bodenhamer, et al.

Filing 64

ORDER ADOPTING 56 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS in full signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 03/19/18 DENYING plaintiff's 44 Motion for court order, 49 Motion for protective custody and 54 Motion for Injunctive Relief. (Benson, A.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ROBERT WILLIAM TUNSTALL, Jr.,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:16-cv-2665 JAM DB P

v.

ORDER

D. BODENHAMER, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

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

18

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

19

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

20

On November 29, 2017, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

21

which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the

22

findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed

23

objections to the findings and recommendations.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this

24
25

court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

26

court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper

27

analysis.

28

/////
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed November 29, 2017, are adopted in full;

3

2. Plaintiff’s motion for court order (ECF No. 44) is denied;

4

3. Plaintiff’s motion for protective custody (ECF No. 49) is denied; and

5

4. Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief (ECF No. 54) is denied

6

DATED: March 19, 2018

7

/s/ John A. Mendez_______________________

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2