Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Michael Louis Foster v. A. Enenmoh

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


June 1, 2012

MICHAEL LOUIS FOSTER,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
A. ENENMOH,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence J. O'Neill United States District Judge

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (Docs. 47, 62, and 66)

Plaintiff Michael Louis Foster, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on December 3, 2008. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On April 16, 2012, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendations recommending denial of Plaintiff's motion seeking preliminary injunctive relief in the form of Metamucil and dietary supplementation, filed on December 29, 2011. The parties were provided thirty days within which to file objections and none were filed.

In addition, on May 31, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking a preliminary injunction prohibiting Defendant's use of Plaintiff's prison and medical records, which he argues will prejudice him at trial. Plaintiff is not entitled to a preliminary injunction enjoining the use of his prison records at trial. *fn1 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(1)(A); Summers v. Earth Island Institute, 555 U.S. 488, 493, 129 S.Ct. 1142 (2009); Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 559-61, 112 S.Ct. 2130 (1992); Mayfield v. United States, 599 F.3d 964, 969 (9th Cir. 2010). Therefore, his motion is denied. *fn2 Plaintiff is not precluded from filing a motion in limine once this matter is set for trial, as that is the proper procedural mechanism to seek preclusion of documents or other evidence at trial.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the 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 Court adopts the Findings and Recommendations filed on April 16, 2012, in full;

2. Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, filed on December 29, 2011, is DENIED; and

3. Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, filed on May 31, 2012, is DENIED, without prejudice to renewal as a motion in limine once this matter is set for trial.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.