Opinion
No. 1:19-cv-01220-DAD-JLT (PC)
07-07-2020
JORGE FERNANDEZ, Plaintiff, v. SATTERFIELD, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
(Doc. Nos. 26, 27)
Plaintiff Jorge Fernandez is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On May 21, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge issued the pending findings and recommendations, recommending that plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. No. 26) be denied. (Doc. No. 27.) Specifically, the magistrate judge found that plaintiff failed to show that he is likely succeed on the merits of his claims or that he will suffer irreparable harm if the court denies his requested relief. (Id. at 2-3.) The magistrate judge also found that plaintiff's requested relief is overly broad. (Id. at 3.) The findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days of service. (Id.) Plaintiff has not filed any objections, and the time in which to do so has since passed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.
Accordingly,
1. The findings and recommendations issued on May 21, 2020 (Doc. No. 27) are adopted in full; and,IT IS SO ORDERED.
2. Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. No. 26) is denied.
Dated: July 7 , 2020
/s/_________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE