(PC) Miller v. Commissioner of the State of California Department of Corrections et al, No. 1:2021cv00176 - Document 16 (E.D. Cal. 2021)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 12 Findings and Recommendations and DENYING 4 Plaintiff's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/2/2021. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KEVIN L. MILLER, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 1:21-cv-00176-DAD-BAM (PC) v. COMMISSIONER OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (Doc. Nos. 4, 12) 16 Defendants. 17 Plaintiff Kevin L. Miller is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 18 19 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 20 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On February 17, 2021, plaintiff filed a motion for permanent and preliminary injunctive 21 22 relief. (Doc. No. 4.) On March 5, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 23 recommendations recommending that plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief be denied. (Doc. No. 24 12.) The findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any 25 objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 4.) To date, no 26 objections to the pending findings and recommendations have been filed, and the time in which to 27 do so has now passed. 28 ///// 1 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 2 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that 3 the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper 4 analysis. 5 Accordingly, 6 1. 7 The findings and recommendations issued on March 5, 2021 (Doc. No. 12) are adopted in full; 8 2. Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. No. 4) is denied; and 9 3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further 10 11 12 proceedings consistent with this order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 2, 2021 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.