(PC) Ellington v. Clark et al, No. 1:2009cv02141 - Document 52 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER Adopting FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 30 , And Denying Motions (ECF NOS. 20 , 22 , 25 ), signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 8/3/2010. It is ORDERED that: The Findings and Recommendations, filed June 7, 2010, is adopted in full. Plaintiff's motions for injunctive relief, filed April 16, 2010, April 29, 2010, and May 11, 2010, are DENIED. (Scrivner, E)

Download PDF
(PC) Ellington v. Clark et al Doc. 52 1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 MARCUS RUBEN ELLINGTON, 7 8 9 CASE NO. 1:09-CV-02141-AWI-DLB PC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING MOTIONS v. CLARK, et al., 10 (ECF NOS. 20, 22, 25) Defendants. / 11 12 Plaintiff Marcus Ruben Ellington (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro 13 se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 14 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 15 On June 7, 2010, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations herein which 16 was served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objection to the Findings and 17 Recommendations was to be filed within twenty days. On June 17, 2010, Plaintiff filed an 18 Objection to the Findings and Recommendations. 19 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court has conducted a de 20 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 21 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 23 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed June 7, 2010, is adopted in full; 24 2. Plaintiff’s motions for injunctive relief, filed April 16, 2010, April 29, 2010, and May 25 26 27 28 11, 2010, are DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 0m8i78 August 3, 2010 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1 Dockets.Justia.com

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.