(PC) Bradford v. Ogbuehi et al, No. 1:2015cv01918 - Document 42 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER Adopting 38 Findings and Recommendations Regarding Plaintiff's 36 Motion for Access to Law Library, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 5/14/18. (Gonzalez, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 RAYMOND ALFORD BRADFORD, Case No. 1:15-cv-01918-AWI-BAM (PC) 10 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ACCESS TO LAW LIBRARY 11 v. 12 C. OGBUEHI, et al., 13 ECF Nos. 36, 38 Defendants. 14 15 16 Plaintiff Raymond Alford Bradford is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 17 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a 18 United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 19 On April 9, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion for an order to attend the law library under 20 priority legal user status. (ECF No. 36.) On April 17, 2018, the Magistrate Judge construed 21 Plaintiff’s motion as a request for a preliminary injunction, and issued findings and 22 recommendations recommending that the motion be denied. In the same order, the Magistrate 23 Judge granted Plaintiff an extension of time to comply with the Court’s order requiring him to 24 submit service documents in this action, based on his allegations of limited law library 25 photocopying access and limited writing supplies. 26 The findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any 27 objections were to be filed within thirty (30) days of service. (ECF No. 38.) Plaintiff timely filed 28 objections on May 5, 2018. (ECF No. 39.) 1 1 Plaintiff objects that the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations are made in 2 retaliation and are in error. The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s objections and finds them to be 3 meritless. 4 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted 5 a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Plaintiff’s 6 objections, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and 7 by proper analysis. 8 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 9 1. The findings and recommendations issued on April 17, 2018, (ECF No. 38), are 10 adopted in full; and 11 2. Plaintiff’s motion for an order to attend the law library under priority legal user 12 status (ECF No. 36) is denied. 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 Dated: May 14, 2018 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
