-SMS (PC) Lamon v. Adams et al, No. 1:2009cv00205 - Document 110 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING Findings and Recommendations IN PART to Deny Plaintiff's Request for Preliminary Injunctive Relief 46 , 84 , signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 5/3/11: The Findings and Recommendations is ADOPTED IN PART; Plaintiff's request for preliminary injunctive relief is DENIED; and The case is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. (Hellings, J)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-SMS (PC) Lamon v. Adams et al Doc. 110 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 BARRY LOUIS LAMON, 10 11 12 CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00205-LJO-SMS PC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN PART TO DENY PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF v. DERRAL ADAMS, et al., (Doc. 46, 84) 13 Defendants. / 14 15 Plaintiff Barry Louis Lamon is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 16 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 17 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 18 On February 1, 2011, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations herein 19 recommending that Plaintiff’s request for preliminary injunctive relief be denied.1 (Doc. 84.) 20 The Findings and Recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any 21 objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. Though 22 objections were filed, neither party objected to the portion of the Findings and Recommendations 23 to deny Plaintiff’s request for preliminary injunctive relief. 24 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the 26 27 28 1 In that same findings and recommendations a motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants was addressed. However, the part of the findings and recommendation addressing that motion for summary judgment has been vacated (Doc. 102) and it is noted that dispositive motions will be addressed subsequent to re-screening and resolution of discovery issues by the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 109). 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. 4 The Findings and Recommendations, filed February 1, 2011 (Doc. 84), is adopted in part; 5 2. Plaintiff’s request for preliminary injunctive relief is denied2; and 6 3. The case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: b9ed48 May 3, 2011 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 2 28 The part of the Findings and Recommendations addressing the defense motion for summary judgment need not be reached at this time. 2
]]>
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.
