Summary
This is a United States District Court order adopting a magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations regarding a pro se prisoner’s request for injunctive relief. The plaintiff filed a Bivens action alleging civil rights violations during a facility lockdown, but failed to file timely objections to the magistrate’s recommendation. After conducting a de novo review, the court found no basis to overturn the recommendation and denied the plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief without prejudice.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court should grant the plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief under a Bivens claim.
Holdings
- The motion for injunctive relief is denied without prejudice.
Key quotations
“According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case.”
“The Court advised him that the “failure to file any objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of certain rights on appeal.” (Id., citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838‑39 (9th Cir. 2014).)”
Factual background
Yury Vasilchuck, while incarcerated at United States Penitentiary Atwater, was subject to a lockdown from August to October 2024. He sought injunctive relief concerning lockdown procedures and mail handling. The magistrate found he could not obtain the requested relief at that time.
Procedural history
Plaintiff filed a Bivens action alleging civil‑rights violations during a prison lockdown. The magistrate judge recommended denial of the injunctive‑relief motion. The district court performed a de novo review, adopted the findings, and denied the motion.