(PC) Rainwater v. Ahlin et al, No. 1:2018cv00049 - Document 34 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DENYING Plaintiff's Motions for Court Orders 8 , 9 , 25 , signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 5/18/2018. (Hellings, J)
Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOHN ALLEN RAINWATER, Plaintiff, 12 13 14 Case No. 1:18-cv-00049-LJO-SAB (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR COURT ORDERS v. PAM AHLIN, et al., (ECF Nos. 8, 9, 25) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff John Allen Rainwater, a civil detainee, is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis 18 in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United 19 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On February 15, 2018, Plaintiff filed two motions for court orders. (ECF Nos. 8 & 9.) On 21 April 6, 2018, the magistrate judge filed a findings and recommendations that construed 22 Plaintiff’s motions for court orders as requests for a preliminary injunction and recommended 23 that the motions be denied. (ECF No. 25.) The findings and recommendations was served on 24 Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to 25 be filed within thirty days from the date of service. The period for filing objections has passed 26 and no objections have been filed. 27 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de 28 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings 1 1 and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations, filed April 6, 2018, is ADOPTED IN FULL; and 4 2 Plaintiff’s motions for court orders (ECF Nos. 8 & 9) are DENIED. 5 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ May 18, 2018 UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 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.