Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_17-cv-00953/USCOURTS-caed-2_17-cv-00953-12/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

DANIEL LEE THORNBERRY,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. BAL, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:17-CV-00953-TLN-DMC

ORDER

Plaintiff Daniel Lee Thornberry (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings 

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 February 19, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which 

were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the 

findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 99.) Neither 

party filed objections to the Findings and Recommendations.

Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 

United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 

reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 

1983); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 

///

Case 2:17-cv-00953-TLN-DMC Document 101 Filed 03/26/20 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

Having reviewed the file under the applicable legal standards, the Court finds the Findings 

and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations filed February 19, 2020 (ECF No. 99), are 

adopted in full;

2. Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief (ECF No. 64) is DENIED; and

3. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 63) is DENIED as premature 

and without prejudice to renewal following the close of discovery within the time limit for fling 

dispositive motions set in the Court’s February 13, 2020, order.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 24, 2020

Case 2:17-cv-00953-TLN-DMC Document 101 Filed 03/26/20 Page 2 of 2