-DLB (PC) Saunders v. Fairman, et al, No. 1:2002cv05806 - Document 163 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 162 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and Denying Plaintiff's 161 Motion signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 12/09/2011. (Flores, E)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-DLB (PC) Saunders v. Fairman, et al 1 Doc. 163 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 JASON SAUNDERS, 5 Plaintiff, 6 7 CASE NO. 1:02-CV-05806-LJO-DLB PC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION v. J. W. FAIRMAN, et al., 8 (DOC. 161) Defendants. 9 / 10 11 Plaintiff Jason Saunders (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se in this 12 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 25, 2011, Plaintiff filed a motion for 13 a court order directing prison librarians to refrain retaliation. Doc. 161. The motion is construed as 14 a motion for preliminary injunction. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 15 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 16 On November 2, 2011, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations which 17 was served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objection to the Findings 18 and Recommendations was to be filed within twenty-one days. Doc. 162. No party filed a timely 19 Objection to the Findings and Recommendations. 20 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court has conducted a de 21 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 22 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 24 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed November 2, 2011, is adopted in full; and 25 2. Plaintiff’s motion, filed October 25, 2011, is denied. 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 Dated: b9ed48 December 9, 2011 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
