-JLT (PC) Edwards v. Junious, et al, No. 1:2010cv01456 - Document 21 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER Adopting Findings and Recommendations 19 , signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 3/28/11. Motions 13 , 18 DENIED. (Verduzco, M)

Download PDF
-JLT (PC) Edwards v. Junious, et al Doc. 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 STEVEN EDWARDS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 Case No. 1:10-cv-01456 OWW JLT (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS vs. (Doc. 19) 14 MAURICE JUNIOUS, et al., 15 Defendant. 16 ________________________________/ 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action 18 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant 19 to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On February 25, 2011, the assigned magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 21 recommending that Plaintiff’s requests for temporary restraining orders be denied. (Doc. 19.) The 22 assigned magistrate judge explained that Plaintiff failed to satisfy any of the legal prerequisites for 23 preliminary injunctive relief. First, Plaintiff failed to demonstrate the likelihood of success on the 24 merits. Second, Plaintiff failed to show that he would suffer irreparable harm in the absence of 25 preliminary relief. And third, Plaintiff failed to show that the balance of equities tips in his favor or 26 that an injunction is in the public interest. 27 The findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any 28 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. The 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 twenty-one day period has since expired, and as of the date of this order, Plaintiff has not filed 2 objections to the findings and recommendations. 3 In accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, the Court has conducted a 4 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings 5 and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. 6 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 7 1. 8 9 are adopted in full; 2. 10 11 The findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge filed February 25, 2011, Plaintiff’s October 18, 2010 motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. 13) is DENIED; and 3. Plaintiff’s January 5, 2011 motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. 18) is DENIED.IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 13 Dated: March 28, 2011 emm0d6 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.