From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harrison v. Birkholz

United States District Court, Central District of California
Apr 3, 2024
2:23-cv-10637-VBF-SHK (C.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2024)

Opinion

2:23-cv-10637-VBF-SHK

04-03-2024

MICHAEL HARRISON, Petitioner, v. B. BIRKHOLZ, Warden, Respondent.


ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

HON. VALERIE BAKER FAIRBANK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO Motion”), the relevant records on file, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. No objections have been filed. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Petition and TRO Motion are DENIED and that Judgment be entered DISMISSING this action with prejudice.


Summaries of

Harrison v. Birkholz

United States District Court, Central District of California
Apr 3, 2024
2:23-cv-10637-VBF-SHK (C.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2024)
Case details for

Harrison v. Birkholz

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL HARRISON, Petitioner, v. B. BIRKHOLZ, Warden, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Apr 3, 2024

Citations

2:23-cv-10637-VBF-SHK (C.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2024)