Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-00392/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-00392-29/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LUIS MANUEL GARCES,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. GAMBOA,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:21-cv-00392-JLT-EPG (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS

(Docs. 125, 137).

Luis Manuel Garces filed a motion that included a request for an order requiring 

Defendants “release all legal work that is being seized.” (Doc. 125.) The assigned magistrate 

judge interpreted this request as one under the All Writs Act and entered findings and 

recommendations, recommending that Plaintiff’s request be denied because Plaintiff failed to 

show that corrections staff are impeding his ability to litigate this action. (Doc. 137).

The Court provided the parties an opportunity to file objections to the findings and 

recommendations. Plaintiff filed extensive objections to several pending findings and 

recommendations on May 22, 2023. (Doc. 143.) Plaintiff generally objects on the grounds that the 

assigned magistrate is biased against Plaintiff and has not properly considered Plaintiff’s 

declarations and evidence. Plaintiff also filed a declaration in support of his objections. (Doc. 

145).

Case 1:21-cv-00392-JLT-EPG Document 146 Filed 05/30/23 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

According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this Court has conducted a de 

novo review of this case. Plaintiff’s objections and declaration cover numerous subjects but fail to 

explain with clarity and specificity the legal materials he is unable to access. This stands in 

contrast to the declarations filed by Defendants, which explain that, aside from days where 

Plaintiff was transported between facilities, Plaintiff has had physical possession of his legal 

property or retained the ability to request access to his legal property. Therefore, the Court finds 

the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the 

Court ORDERS:

1. The findings and recommendations issued on April 26, 2023 (Doc. 137), are 

ADOPTED IN FULL.

2. Plaintiff’s request for an order under the All Writs Act (Doc. 125) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 26, 2023 

Case 1:21-cv-00392-JLT-EPG Document 146 Filed 05/30/23 Page 2 of 2