Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01951/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01951-1/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 Joshua A. Willard is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On February 20, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations 

recommending denial Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order. (ECF No. 10.) The 

Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that objections were to 

be filed within thirty days. Plaintiff filed objections on March 4, 2015. 

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. In his objections, to the 

extent Plaintiff complains of verbal threats by a certain defendant that is insufficient not sufficient to 

state a cognizable section 1983 claim. Mere verbal harassment or abuse does not violate the 

Constitution and, thus, does not give rise to a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Oltarzewski v. 

JOSHUA A. WILLARD,

 Plaintiff,

v.

J. NEIBERT, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-01951-AWI-SAB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION, DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING 

ORDER

[ECF Nos. 3, 10]

Case 1:14-cv-01951-AWI-SAB Document 13 Filed 03/11/15 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

Ruggiero, 830 F.3d 136, 139 (9th Cir. 1987). Threats do not rise to the level of a constitutional 

violation. Gaut v. Sunn, 810 F.2d 923, 925 (9th Cir. 1987). 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on February 20, 2015, is adopted in full; and

2. Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 11, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01951-AWI-SAB Document 13 Filed 03/11/15 Page 2 of 2