(PC) Bealer v. Secretary of California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al, No. 1:2016cv00671 - Document 21 (E.D. Cal. 2017)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 16 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and ORDER DENYING 6 Plaintiff's Motion for Injunctive Relief signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 3/17/2017. (Jessen, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 ANTWOINE BEALER, 10 Plaintiff, 11 12 13 CASE NO. 1:16-cv-00671-LJO-MJS (PC) v. SECRETARY OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITAITON, et al., ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (ECF Nos. 6, 16) 14 Defendants. 15 16 17 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 19 rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. No other parties have appeared in 20 the action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 21 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the United States District Court for the 22 Eastern District of California. 23 On January 17, 2017, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and a 24 recommendation to deny Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief. (ECF No. 16.) Plaintiff filed 25 no objections, and the time for doing so has passed.1 26 27 28 1 On January 30, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for a thirty-day extension of time to file objections. (ECF No. 19.) The motion was granted. (ECF No. 20.) Plaintiff nonetheless did not file objections before the expiration of the extended deadline. 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has 2 conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 3 Court finds the findings and recommendation to be supported by the record and by 4 proper analysis. 5 Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. 7 8 The findings and recommendation issued by the Magistrate Judge on January 17, 2017 (ECF No. 16) are adopted in full; and 2. Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief (ECF No. 6) is DENIED. 9 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ March 17, 2017 UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
