(PC) Davis v. Walker et al, No. 2:2008cv00593 - Document 390 (E.D. Cal. 2024)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Senior District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 10/08/24 ADOPTING 369 Findings and Recommendations in full and ORDERING as follows: DENYING 345 364 Motions for Preliminary Injunction; DENYING 354 358 Motions to Certify a Class Action; DENYING 355 359 Motions for Appointment of Counsel to represent a class and DENYING 362 Motion to Examine a Correctional Counselor. (Benson, A.)

Download PDF
(PC) Davis v. Walker et al Doc. 390 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KENNARD DAVIS, 12 13 14 No. 2:08-cv-00593-KJM-SCR Plaintiff, v. JAMES WALKER, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 KENNARD DAVIS, 18 19 20 21 No. 2:10-cv-02139-KJM-SCR Plaintiff, v. JAMES WALKER, et al., ORDER Defendants. 22 23 24 25 Plaintiff, a state prisoner, proceeds with these civil rights actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 26 The matters were referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. 27 § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 On April 24, 2024, the previously assigned1 magistrate judge filed findings and 2 recommendations herein which were served on the parties, and which contained notice to the 3 parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen 4 days. Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 5 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 6 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, including plaintiff’s 7 objections, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and 8 by the proper analysis. 9 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 10 11 1. For case no. 2:08-cv-0593-KJM-SCR, the findings and recommendations (ECF No. 369) are adopted in full; 12 a. Plaintiff’s motions for preliminary injunctive relief (ECF Nos. 345, 364) are 13 denied; 14 b. Plaintiff’s motions to certify a class action (ECF Nos. 354, 358) are denied; 15 c. Plaintiff’s motions for the appointment of counsel to represent a class (ECF Nos. 16 355, 359) are denied; and 17 d. Plaintiff’s motion to examine a correctional counselor (ECF No. 362) is denied. 18 19 2. For case no. 2:10-cv-2139-KJM-SCR, the findings and recommendations (ECF No. 446) are adopted in full; 20 a. Plaintiff’s motions for preliminary injunctive relief (ECF Nos. 421, 441) are 21 denied; 22 b. Plaintiff’s motion for a telephone conference regarding her motions for 23 preliminary injunctive relief (ECF No. 422) is denied; 24 25 c. Plaintiff’s motions to certify a class action (ECF Nos. 432, 435) are denied; ///// 26 27 28 1 Due to the appointment of a new magistrate judge to the Eastern District of California bench, this case was reassigned from Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes to Magistrate Judge Sean C. Riordan for all further proceedings. See Reassignment Order, ECF No. 382. 2 1 2 3 4 d. Plaintiff’s motions for the appointment of counsel to represent a class (ECF Nos. 431, 436) are denied; and e. Plaintiff’s motion to examine a correctional counselor (ECF No. 439) is denied. DATED: October 8, 2024. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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.