Quiroga v. King

Full title: MONICO J. QUIROGA, Plaintiff, v. THEODORE KING, Defendant.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Aug 26, 2016

CASE NO. 1:15-cv-01697-AWI-MJS (PC) (E.D. Cal. Aug. 26, 2016)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:15-cv-01697-AWI-MJS (PC)

08-26-2016

MONICO J. QUIROGA, Plaintiff, v. THEODORE KING, Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

(ECF No. 22)

Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action brought 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.

Plaintiff initiated this action on November 9, 2015. (ECF No. 1.) His second amended complaint (ECF No. 20) is awaiting screening. On July 22, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations (ECF No. 22) to deny Plaintiff's February 22, 2016 motion for a temporary restraining order (ECF No. 11.) On August 1, 2016, Plaintiff filed an objection to the Magistrate Judge's findings. (ECF No. 23.) Plaintiff's objection is comprised of one sentence: "Objection to Magistrate Judge's findings and recommendations due to investigation negligence and sexual assault because of investigation." (ECF No. 23.)

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, 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. Plaintiff's terse and ambiguous objection provides no basis to reject the Findings and Recommendation.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Court adopts the findings and recommendations filed on July 22, 2016 (ECF No. 22) in full; and

2. Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order (ECF No. 11) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 26, 2016

/s/_________

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE