(PC) Blackgold v. KVSP Case Records ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SUTEN BLACKGOLD, ) Case No.: 1:21-cv-0857 JLT SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND ) RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING 13 v. ) PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ACCESS TO THE ) LAW LIBRARY 14 KERN VALLEY STATE PRISON CARE ) RECORDS, et al., ) (Docs. 34, 36) 15 ) Defendants. ) 16 ) 17 Suten Blackgold seeks to hold the defendants liable for civil rights violations pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 17, 2023, Plaintiff filed a “Notice to the Court” in which Plaintiff indicated 19 Kern Valley State Prison was denying access to the law library, legal copies, and envelopes. (Doc. 34.) 20 Defendants filed an opposition to the notice on February 6, 2023. (Doc. 35.) The magistrate judge 21 construed the notice as a request for preliminary injunction. (Doc. 36.) 22 The magistrate judge reviewed the declaration of the Litigation Coordinator at KVSP and found 23 “it is clear that Plaintiff has been able to attend the law library, and obtain photocopies and mailing 24 supplies during the time frame at issue.” (Doc. 36 at 3.) The magistrate judge also determined the 25 request was “not sufficient[ly] related to the allegations in the complaint and [the] contentions in the 26 current notice constitute a new allegations and legal claim.” (Id.) The magistrate judge found Plaintiff 27 failed to show an “‘actual injury’ by the failure of access to the law library.” (Id.) The magistrate 28 judge found Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that if injunctive relief was not granted, then an actual injury 1 || in prosecuting the matter would result. Ud. at 4.) Consequently, the magistrate judge recommended 2 || the notice, construed as a request for injunctive relief, be denied. (/d.) 3 The Findings and Recommendations were served on the parties on February 8, 2023. It 4 || notified the parties that written objections were due within 14 days of the date of service and that thei 5 || “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” 6 || (Doc. 36 at 4, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014); Baxter v. Sullivan, 7 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991).) No objections were filed, and the time to do so has passed. 8 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court conducted a de novo review of the case. 9 || Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations 10 || are supported by the record and by proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 11 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on February 8, 2023 (Doc. 36), are 12 ADOPTED in full. 13 2. Plaintiff's motion for access to the law library (Doc. 34) is DENIED. 14 15 IS SO ORDERED. 16 | Dated: _March 9, 2023 Charis [Tourn 17 TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28