(PC) Abreu v. Caviness et al, No. 1:2015cv01085 - Document 19 (E.D. Cal. 2015)
Court Description: ORDER Adopting 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 12/7/2015. (Sant Agata, S)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 TAI EDMUND FRED ABREU, Case No. 1:15-cv-01085-AWI-JLT (PC) 10 Plaintiff, 11 ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND v. 12 (Doc. 15) CAVINESS, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 Plaintiff, Tai Edmund Fred Abreu, is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights 16 action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 which he filed on July 14, 2015. The matter was referred to a 17 United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 18 On November 5, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations 19 which was served on Plaintiff and contained notice that Objections to the Findings and 20 Recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. Plaintiff filed an Objection on November 21 30, 2015. 22 In his objections, Plaintiff argues that he never requested injunctive relief and that he has 23 no safety concerns. However, since Plaintiff was requesting an order to compel prison employees 24 to produce a copy of his certified trust account statement, his motion was properly construed as 25 requesting injunctive relief -- over which the Court lacks jurisdiction. It is, however, noted that 26 27 the recommendation to forward a copy of the Findings and Recommendation to the Warden’s office and the Litigation Coordinator at High Desert State Prison so “they might be made aware 28 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 of Plaintiff’s safety concerns” was in error. It is both reasonable and in Plaintiff’s favor for the Warden’s office and the Litigation Coordinator be made aware of so as to be able to correct the issue that is causing Plaintiff to have difficulty obtaining the requisite document to support his request to be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis, but the recommendation should not have included the word “safety” as Plaintiff raised no safety/security issues in his motion. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on November 5, 2015 is adopted in full; 2. Plaintiff’s motion seeking to compel the prison to produce a certified copy of his 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 trust account statement, filed on November 2, 2015 (Doc. 14), is denied; and 3. The Clerk’s Office is directed to forward a copy of this order, the Findings and Recommendation that issued on November 5, 2015 (Doc. 15), and Plaintiff's motion (Doc. 14) to the Warden's office and to Litigation Coordinator at High Desert State Prison via facsimile transfer that they might be made aware of the difficulty Plaintiff is experiencing in obtaining a certified copy of his trust account statement. 19 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 Dated: December 7, 2015 22 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
