From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McDaniel v. Hubbard

United States District Court, E.D. California
Oct 6, 2008
No. 2:07-cv-1189 JAM JFM (PC) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 6, 2008)

Opinion

No. 2:07-cv-1189 JAM JFM (PC).

October 6, 2008


ORDER


Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 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 General Order No. 262.

On July 21, 2008, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. On July 23, 2008, plaintiff filed a document styled "Reply to Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for a T.R.O. and/or Preliminary Injunction." (Id.) The court construes this filing as objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-304, this 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.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed July 21, 2008, are adopted in full; and

2. Plaintiff's June 9, 2008 motion for temporary restraining order and/or for preliminary injunction is denied.


Summaries of

McDaniel v. Hubbard

United States District Court, E.D. California
Oct 6, 2008
No. 2:07-cv-1189 JAM JFM (PC) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 6, 2008)
Case details for

McDaniel v. Hubbard

Case Details

Full title:CLIFTON JEROME McDANIEL, Plaintiff, v. S. HUBBARD, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Oct 6, 2008

Citations

No. 2:07-cv-1189 JAM JFM (PC) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 6, 2008)