(PC) Hammler v. Director of CDCR et al, No. 2:2017cv01949 - Document 23 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER adopting in full 14 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., on 4/30/18. Plaintiff's 7 motion for preliminary injunction is DENIED. Plaintiff's 10 motion for class certification is DENIED. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is DISMISSED as a defendant. (Kastilahn, A)

Download PDF
(PC) Hammler v. Director of CDCR et al Doc. 23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HAMMLER, 12 No. 2:17-cv-1949 MCE DB P Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 DIRECTOR OF CDCR, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with an action 17 18 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 19 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On March 14, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 20 21 which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiff has 23 not filed objections to the findings and recommendations. However, plaintiff has filed a response 24 to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 21.) The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 25 26 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 27 ORDERED that: 28 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 14, 2018 (ECF No. 14), are adopted in full; 3 2. Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction (ECF No. 7) is denied; 4 3. Plaintiff’s motion for class certification (ECF No. 10) is denied; and 5 4. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is dismissed as a 6 7 8 defendant. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 30, 2018 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.