Peyton v. Vasquez

Full title: LEE EDWARD PEYTON, Plaintiff, v. PAT L. VASQUEZ, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Mar 20, 2007

1:06-cv-01758-OWW-NEW (DLB) PC (E.D. Cal. Mar. 20, 2007)

Opinion

1:06-cv-01758-OWW-NEW (DLB) PC.

March 20, 2007

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 8) ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (Docs. 7, 11, 14, and 15)

OLIVER WANGER, District Judge

Plaintiff Lee Edward Peyton ("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 Rule 72-302.

On January 26, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations herein which was served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objection to the Findings and Recommendations was to be filed within thirty days. To date, plaintiff has not filed any objection to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 73-305, 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, and it shall be adopted in full.

On February 21, 2007, plaintiff filed another motion seeking preliminary injunctive relief. For the reasons set forth in detail in the Findings and Recommendations filed on January 26, 2007, and the Order filed on February 15, 2007, plaintiff's motion for relief concerning his current conditions of confinement at High Desert State Prison shall be denied. City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102, 103 S.Ct. 1660, 1665 (1983); Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471, 102 S.Ct. 752, 757-58 (1982); Jones v. City of Los Angeles, 444 F.3d 1118, 1126 (9th Cir. 2006).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed January 26, 2007, is ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief, filed January 16, 2007, and supplemented on January 29, is DENIED; and

3. Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief, filed on February 21, 2007, is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.