Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01085/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01085-3/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

TAI EDMUND FRED ABREU, 

Plaintiff,

v.

CAVINESS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:15-cv-01085-AWI-JLT (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND

(Doc. 15)

Plaintiff, Tai Edmund Fred Abreu, is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights 

action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 which he filed on July 14, 2015. 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 November 5, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations 

which was served on Plaintiff and contained notice that Objections to the Findings and 

Recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. Plaintiff filed an Objection on November 

30, 2015. 

In his objections, Plaintiff argues that he never requested injunctive relief and that he has 

no safety concerns. However, since Plaintiff was requesting an order to compel prison employees 

to produce a copy of his certified trust account statement, his motion was properly construed as 

requesting injunctive relief -- over which the Court lacks jurisdiction. It is, however, noted that 

the recommendation to forward a copy of the Findings and Recommendation to the Warden’s 

office and the Litigation Coordinator at High Desert State Prison so “they might be made aware 

Case 1:15-cv-01085-AWI-JLT Document 19 Filed 12/08/15 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

of Plaintiff’s safety concerns” was in error. It is both reasonable and in Plaintiff’s favor for the 

Warden’s office and the Litigation Coordinator be made aware of so as to be able to correct the 

issue that is causing Plaintiff to have difficulty obtaining the requisite document to support his 

request to be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis, but the recommendation should not have 

included the word “safety” as Plaintiff raised no safety/security issues in his motion. 

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, filed on November 5, 2015 is adopted in full; 

2. Plaintiff’s motion seeking to compel the prison to produce a certified copy of his 

trust account statement, filed on November 2, 2015 (Doc. 14), is denied; and

3. The Clerk’s Office is directed to forward a copy of this order, the Findings and 

Recommendation that issued on November 5, 2015 (Doc. 15), and Plaintiff's 

motion (Doc. 14) to the Warden's office and to Litigation Coordinator at High 

Desert State Prison via facsimile transfer that they might be made aware of the 

difficulty Plaintiff is experiencing in obtaining a certified copy of his trust account 

statement. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 7, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01085-AWI-JLT Document 19 Filed 12/08/15 Page 2 of 2