Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01083/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01083-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Ricardo Verduzco is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 

On October 14, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations 

recommending that Plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief be denied. (ECF No. 10.) Specifically, 

Plaintiff requested an order directing CDCR to stop collecting restitution fine funds from his inmate 

trust account until the filing fee for this action is paid in full. The Magistrate Judge found that the court 

lacks jurisdiction to order CDCR to stop collecting state mandated restitution, as CDCR is not a party 

to this action.

The Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that 

objections were to be filed within thirty (30) days. Over thirty days have passed, and no objections 

were filed. 

RICARDO VERDUZCO,

 Plaintiff,

v.

C. GIPSON, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-01083-AWI-SAB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING MOTION 

FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

[ECF Nos. 21, 23]

Case 1:14-cv-01083-AWI-SAB Document 26 Filed 12/02/16 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de 

novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 

Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued October 14, 2016 (ECF No. 23), are 

adopted in full; and

2. Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief, filed June 9, 2016 (ECF No. 21), is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 2, 2016 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01083-AWI-SAB Document 26 Filed 12/02/16 Page 2 of 2