Opinion
No. CIV-S-07-1036 LKK EFB PS.
February 25, 2008
ORDER
On December 27, 2007, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within ten days. No objections were filed.
Accordingly, the court presumes any findings of fact are correct. See Orland v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1999). The magistrate judge's conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).
The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the proposed Findings and Recommendations in full.
Just prior to publication of the Findings and Recommendations, plaintiff filed an "emergency ex parte application" in which seeks an order excluding him from "any and all consideration for out-of-state-transfer" and transferring him from the California Men's Colony to Folsom State Prison. Although this order remanding this action to state court moots all pending motions, plaintiff's ex parte motion should nonetheless be denied on its merits. A prisoner does not have a constitutional right to be housed at a particular facility. Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215, 224 (1976); Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238, 245-49 (1983). Plaintiff merely alleges the possibility of a transfer. Moreover, he does not allege that the potential transfer is retaliatory or otherwise designed to penalize him. See Fajeriak v. McGinnis, 493 F.2d 468, 470 (9th Cir. 1974). Accordingly, plaintiff's ex parte application for injunctive relief is denied.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations filed December 27, 2007, are ADOPTED;
2. This action is REMANDED to the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Sacramento; and
3. Plaintiff's ex parte application for injunctive relief is denied.