(PC) Estevez v. Lunsford et al, No. 1:2010cv01444 - Document 26 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER Adopting 22 Findings and Recommendations; ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 16 Motion for Preliminary Injuctive Relief, signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 4/12/2011. (Gonzalez, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Estevez v. Lunsford et al Doc. 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JESUS ESTEVEZ, CASE NO. 1:10-cv-01444-AWI-GBC (PC) 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. ERIC LUNSFORD, et al., ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Defendants. (Docs. 16, 22) 16 ______________________________________/ 17 18 Jesus Estevez (“Plaintiff’) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant 19 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 20 § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On September 14, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion for a preliminary injunction requesting that 22 officials at the High Dessert State Prison be required to provide him expanded access to his legal 23 materials and the law library. (Doc. 16.). On January 11, 2011, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings 24 and Recommendations herein which was served on the parties and which contained notice that any 25 objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. Neither party has 26 submitted objections to the Findings and Recommendations. 27 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de 28 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed January 11, 2011, is adopted in full; and 4 2. Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunctive relief, filed September 14, 2010, is 5 6 DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 Dated: 0m8i78 April 12, 2011 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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.
