-EFB (PC) Williams v. Gomez et al, No. 2:2011cv00426 - Document 39 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 12/15/2011 ADOPTING 26 Findings and Recommendations; DENYING 13 , 22 and 25 Motions for Injunctive Relief; TREMINATING 32 Motion for Reconsideration. (Michel, G)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-EFB (PC) Williams v. Gomez et al Doc. 39 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LONNIE WILLIAMS, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 No. CIV S-11-0426 GEB EFB P vs. GOMEZ, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 ORDER / 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action 17 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 18 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 19 On August 1, 2011, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 20 herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any 21 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days from the 22 date the findings and recommendations were served. Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings 23 and recommendations and defendants have filed a response thereto. 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 25 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 26 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 2 proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed August 1, 2011, are adopted in full; 5 6 7 and 2. Plaintiff’s motions for injunctive relief, Dckt. Nos. 13, 22, 25, are denied, and the clerk of the court is directed to terminate Dckt. No. 32. 8 So ordered. 9 Dated: December 15, 2011 10 11 12 GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.
