The opinion of the court was delivered by: John A. Mendez United States District Court Judge
Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Eastern District of California local rules.
Plaintiff seeks reconsideration of the Magistrate Judge's June 28, 2012, order.*fn1
Pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 303(f), a Magistrate Judge's order shall be upheld unless "clearly erroneous or contrary to law." Upon review of the entire file, the court finds that it does not appear that the Magistrate Judge's ruling was clearly erroneous or contrary to law. The June 28, 2012, order will, therefore, be affirmed.
On July 6, 2012, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections within a specified time. Timely objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304(f), 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. Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration (Doc. 50) is denied;
2. No further motions for reconsideration of the Magistrate Judge's June 28, 2012, order shall be considered;
3. The findings and recommendations filed July 6, 2012, are adopted in full; and
4. Plaintiff's motions for injunctive relief (Docs. 27, 37, ...