(PC) Henry v. Cate et al, No. 1:2014cv00791 - Document 68 (E.D. Cal. 2016)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 58 & 59 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and ORDER DENYING 56 & 57 Plaintiff's Motions Seeking Court Intervention, For Lack of Jurisdiction signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 3/31/2016. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 KENNETH R. HENRY, Case No. 1:14-cv-00791-LJO-SKO (PC) 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS SEEKING COURT INTERVENTION FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION CATE, et al., 13 (Docs. 56-59) Defendants. 14 15 Plaintiff, Kenneth R. Henry, is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 16 this civil rights action under 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, 2016, the Magistrate Judge filed two Findings and Recommendations to 19 deny Plaintiff’s motions seeking court intervention regarding his housing, which were served on 20 the parties and contained notice that objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be 21 filed within thirty days. Neither side filed any objections. Local Rule 304(b), (d). 22 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a 23 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the 24 Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 25 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 26 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on February 1, 2016 (Docs. 58, 59), are 27 adopted in full; and 28 1 1 2. 2 Plaintiff’s motions, filed on January 28, 2016 (Docs. 56, 57) requesting court intervention regarding where he is housed, are denied for lack of jurisdiction. 3 4 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill March 31, 2016 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 7 8 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.