Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00148/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00148-2/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

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GEORGE JACKSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

R. DAVIS, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:16-cv-00148-DAD-MJS

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING 

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

(Doc. Nos. 2, 8, 10)

Plaintiff George Jackson, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed 

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on February 2, 2016. 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 February 2, May 9, and June 9, 2016, plaintiff filed motions for preliminary relief, the 

first in the form of a motion for a temporary restraining order and the latter two as motions for 

preliminary injunction. (Doc. Nos. 2, 8, 10.) On July 7, 2016, the assigned magistrate judge 

issued findings and recommendations recommending that the motions be denied without 

prejudice. (Doc. No. 12.) Those findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and 

contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within thirty days. On August 15, 

2016, plaintiff filed objections. (Doc. No. 12.) 

/////

/////

Case 1:16-cv-00148-LJO-JLT Document 16 Filed 09/12/16 Page 1 of 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

2

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, including plaintiff’s 

objections, the court finds that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and 

by proper analysis.

Given the foregoing:

1. The findings and recommendations, filed July 7, 2016 (Doc. No. 12), are adopted in 

full; 

2. Plaintiff’s motions seeking preliminary relief (Doc. Nos. 2, 8, 10) are denied without 

prejudice; and

3. The matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 9, 2016 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00148-LJO-JLT Document 16 Filed 09/12/16 Page 2 of 2