(PC) Hodges v. Seibert et al

Filing 21

ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 10/13/2020 ADOPTING 13 Findings and Recommendations in full, DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE 12 Letter which is construed as a request for a temporary restraining order. (Coll, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JAMES ALBERT HODGES,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:20-cv-00896-JAM-CKD

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

J. SEIBERT, et al.,
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 August 28, 2020, 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 not filed

23

objections to the findings and recommendations.

24

The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602

25

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

26

See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having

27

reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record

28

and by the magistrate judge’s analysis.
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed August 28, 2020, are adopted in full; and

3

2. Plaintiff’s August 20, 2020 letter regarding concerns for his safety (ECF No. 12) is

4

construed as a request for a temporary restraining order. So construed, the request is denied

5

without prejudice.

6
7
8
9

DATED: October 13, 2020

/s/ John A. Mendez
THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

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