Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05950/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05950-1/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

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

JAMES E. SMITH,

Plaintiff,

vs.

SCRIBNER, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:04-cv-05950-OWW-LJO-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS, AND DENYING

MOTIONS FOR PRELIMINARY

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

(Docs. 16, 17, 19, 21, 26, 32,

33, 38, 40, and 41)

Plaintiff James E. Smith (“plaintiff”), a state prisoner

proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil

rights action seeking relief under 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 72-302.

On January 19, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings

and Recommendations herein which was served on plaintiff and

which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the

Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30)

days. On February 24, 2005 and April 18, 2005, respectively,

Case 1:04-cv-05950-OWW -LJO Document 43 Filed 07/08/05 Page 1 of 3
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

plaintiff filed a motion to extend time. On March 14, 2005 and

May 5, 2005, respectively, the court granted plaintiff thirty

(30) days within which to respond. Plaintiff has not filed

timely objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and

Recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 73-305, this 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,

plaintiff’s motions for preliminary injunctive relief shall be

denied.

In addition, after the Findings and Recommendations was

issued, plaintiff filed motions for preliminary injunctive relief

on March 21, 2005, April 12, 2005, May 24, 2005, June 10, 2005,

and June 28, 2005. For the reasons set forth in the Findings and

Recommendations of January 19, 2005, plaintiff’s subsequently

filed motions for preliminary injunctive relief shall also be

denied. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed January 19,

2005, is ADOPTED IN FULL; and

2. Plaintiff’s motions for preliminary injunctive relief,

filed November 29, 2004, December 15, 2004, January 4, 2005, 

///

///

///

///

Case 1:04-cv-05950-OWW -LJO Document 43 Filed 07/08/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

January 18, 2005, March 21, 2005, April 12, 2005, May 24, 2005,

June 10, 2005, and June 28, 2005, are DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 7, 2005 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05950-OWW -LJO Document 43 Filed 07/08/05 Page 3 of 3