Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01581/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01581-2/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

To the extent this document concerns plaintiff’s compliance with the court’s 1

August 3, 2006 order regarding fees, the court will address the request by separate order issued

herewith. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RONNIE O. BROWN, No. CIV S-06-1581-LKK-CMK-P

Plaintiff, 

vs. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

BOARD OF PRISON TERMS,

et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 21, 2006, plaintiff submitted a document entitled “Notice of

Motion and a Motion to Direct the Warden and/or the Parties to Comply with the Court Order to

Issue an Certified Copy Trust Account and Request for a Further Order Directing Parties or

Custodian to Allow Plaintiff Access to Law Library.” This document is construed, in part, as a

request for injunctive relief in the form of an order directing defendants to allow plaintiff access

to the prison law library.1

Case 2:06-cv-01581-LKK -CMK Document 9 Filed 09/12/06 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

2

Plaintiff’s motion is premature. As of the date of this order, plaintiff is under no

court-imposed deadline which requires access to the law library. The only current deadline in

this case is for plaintiff to resolve fees either by paying the full statutory filing fee or submitting

a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis. Compliance does not require any legal

research. Therefore, plaintiff’s motion should be denied without prejudice as premature.

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends that, to the extent plaintiff’s

August 21, 2006, document seeks injunctive relief in the form of an order directing defendants to

permit library access, the motion be denied without prejudice as premature. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within ten days

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's

Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive

the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: September 11, 2006.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-01581-LKK -CMK Document 9 Filed 09/12/06 Page 2 of 2