UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 18, 2011
PHILLIP T. RICKER, PLAINTIFF,
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. James V. Selna United States District Judge
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the First Amended Complaint, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff's "Opposition to Magistrate's Recommendations and Findings" ("Objections"), and the remaining record, and has made a de novo determination.
Plaintiff's Objections generally regurgitate the arguments made in his Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, and lack merit for the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation. The fact remains that Plaintiff's claim is premised upon his disagreement with prison doctors regarding his specific medical treatment. Such a claim is not cognizable under the Eighth Amendment.
Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction ("Motion") fails for the same reason. "A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits[.]" Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 129 S.Ct. 365, 374 (2008). Plaintiff cannot do so here in light of the Court's adoption of the Report and Recommendation.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The Report and Recommendation is approved and adopted.
2. Judgment be entered dismissing this action with prejudice.
3. The Clerk serve copies of this Order and the Judgment on the parties.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.