(PC) Cecil vs. Beard, No. 2:2013cv01923 - Document 55 (E.D. Cal. 2014)

Court Description: ORDER adopting in full 41 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 6/20/14. Plaintiff's 34 motion for injunctive relief is denied. (Kastilahn, A)

Download PDF
(PC) Cecil vs. Beard Doc. 55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GARY CECIL, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:13-cv-1923 TLN KJN P v. ORDER JEFF BEARD, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 19 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On April 25, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 21 were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff did not file objections.1 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 23 24 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 25 26 27 28 1 On May 21, 2014, after the magistrate judge issued his findings and recommendations (ECF No. 41) and the period for objections had lapsed, Plaintiff filed a statement of non-opposition (ECF No. 46) to Defendants’ opposition (ECF No. 39) to the motion for injunctive relief (ECF No. 34). In the statement of non-opposition, Plaintiff disputes Defendants’ characterization of his medical condition but does not object to the instant findings and recommendations. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed April 24, 2014, are adopted in full; and 3 2. Plaintiff’s October 3, 2014 motion for injunctive relief (ECF No. 34) is denied. 4 Dated: June 20, 2014 5 6 7 8 Troy L. Nunley United States District Judge 9 10 11 /ceci1923.800 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.