(PC) Richardson v. Bryant, et al, No. 1:1999cv06575 - Document 92 (E.D. Cal. 2008)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS 89 ; ORDER Denying Motion For Preliminary Injunction signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 2/5/2008. (Esteves, C)

Download PDF
(PC) Richardson v. Bryant, et al Doc. 92 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PATRICK L. RICHARDSON, 1:99-cv-06575-OWW-GSA-PC 12 Plaintiff, 13 vs. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 89) 14 H. BRYANT, et al., 15 ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION 16 17 Defendants. _____________________________/ 18 Patrick L. Richardson (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil 19 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 20 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302. 21 On December 18, 2007, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending 22 that plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction be denied. Plaintiff was provided an opportunity 23 to file objections to the findings and recommendations within thirty days. To date, plaintiff has not 24 filed objections or otherwise responded to the findings and recommendations. 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. ' 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 73- 26 305, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 27 /// 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper 2 analysis. 3 Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that: 4 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on December 5 6 18, 2007, are ADOPTED IN FULL; and 2. Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, submitted as part of the Second 7 Amended Complaint filed July 3, 2007, is DENIED. 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: February 5, 2008 emm0d6 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.