Opinion
1:23-cv-0241 JLT BAM (PC)
05-05-2023
PHILLIP JOSEPH JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. TRINH, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
(DOCS. 3, 10)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR COURT ORDER
(DOCS. 17, 20)
Phillip Joseph Johnson is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff's complaint has not yet been screened.
On February 17, 2023, Plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order preventing his transfer between CDCR institutions and mental health level of care. (Doc. 3 at 4-5.) On February 21, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge issued Findings and Recommendations, recommending that Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order be denied. (Doc. 10.) The Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within 14. (Id. at 4.) Following an extension of time, Plaintiff's objections were due on or before April 11, 2023. (Docs. 14, 19.) However, Plaintiff did not file objections, and the deadline to do so has expired.
On March 13, 2023, while the Findings and Recommendations were pending, Plaintiff filed a motion for a court order, which the Court construed as a motion for preliminary injunction regarding production of Plaintiff's property and access to the prison law library following his transfer to a new institution. (Docs. 17, 20.) The magistrate judge found Plaintiff made “no showing that he will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, or that an injunction is in the public interest.” (Doc. 20 at 3.) Thus, the magistrate judge recommended the motion be denied. (Id.) The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff on March 15, 2023, and the Court informed him that any objections were due within 14 days. (Id. at 14) Plaintiff again did not file any objections and the second deadline has also expired.
According to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire action, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations issued on February 21, 2023 (Doc. 10) and March 15, 2023 (Doc. 20) are supported by the record and by proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS:
1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on February 21, 2023 (Doc. 10) and March 15, 2023 (Doc. 20) are ADOPTED in full.
2. Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order, (Doc. 3) is DENIED without prejudice.
3. Plaintiff's motion for court order (Doc. 17) is DENIED without prejudice.
4. The matter is referred to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.