United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2025

Mujaahid Harris v. Valladolid, et al.

Mujaahid Harris v. Valladolid, et al.
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided November 10, 2025
Mujaahid Harris v. Valladolid, et al.

Trial Court Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MUJAAHID HARRIS, Case No.: 1:23-cv-01502 JLT EPG (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT PLAINTIFF’S 13 v. MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER VALLADOLID, et al., BE DENIED 15 Defendants. (Doc. 71) Mujaahid F. Harris is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order seeking an order requiring Defendants to provide all printed copies of x-rays of his left shoulder from December 2020 to present; to reinstate all durable medical equipment and other accessories that was permanent (such as exercise band, wedge pillow and shoe inserts); and to provide physical therapy through outside agency or transfer Plaintiff immediately so as to be provided physical therapy at another prison. (Doc. 71.)

The assigned magistrate judge issued Findings and Recommendations that Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order be denied. (Doc. 71.) The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on the parties and notified them that any objections were due within 30 days. (Id. at 16–17.) The Court also advised the parties that the “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.”

1 | Ud., citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) No objections were | filed, and the time to do so has passed.

3 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court performed a de novo review of this | case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and | Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 6 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on September 11, 2025 (Doc. 71) are 7 ADOPTED in full.

8 2. Defendants’ motion for preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order (Doc.

9 42.)

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12 | Dated: _November 8, 2025 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.