(PC) Blackgold v. KVSP Case Records

Opinion

SUTEN BLACKGOLD, ) Case No.: 1:21-cv-0857 JLT SAB (PC) ) Plaintiff, ) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND ) RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING v. ) PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ACCESS TO THE ) LAW LIBRARY RECORDS, et al., ) (Docs. 34, 36) ) Defendants. ) )

Suten Blackgold seeks to hold the defendants liable for civil rights violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 17, 2023, Plaintiff filed a “Notice to the Court” in which Plaintiff indicated Kern Valley State Prison was denying access to the law library, legal copies, and envelopes. (Doc. 34.) Defendants filed an opposition to the notice on February 6, 2023. (Doc. 35.) The magistrate judge construed the notice as a request for preliminary injunction. (Doc. 36.) The magistrate judge reviewed the declaration of the Litigation Coordinator at KVSP and found “it is clear that Plaintiff has been able to attend the law library, and obtain photocopies and mailing supplies during the time frame at issue.” (Doc. 36 at 3.) The magistrate judge also determined the request was “not sufficient[ly] related to the allegations in the complaint and [the] contentions in the current notice constitute a new allegations and legal claim.” (Id.) The magistrate judge found Plaintiff failed to show an “‘actual injury’ by the failure of access to the law library.” (Id.) The magistrate judge found Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that if injunctive relief was not granted, then an actual injury in prosecuting the matter would result. Ud. at 4.) Consequently, the magistrate judge recommended the notice, construed as a request for injunctive relief, be denied. (/d.) The Findings and Recommendations were served on the parties on February 8, 2023. It notified the parties that written objections were due within 14 days of the date of service and that thei “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (Doc. 36 at 4, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014); Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991).) No objections were filed, and the time to do so has passed. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on February 8, 2023 (Doc. 36), are ADOPTED in full. 2. Plaintiff's motion for access to the law library (Doc. 34) is DENIED. Dated: _March 9, 2023 Charis [Tourn TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE