(PC) Thomas v. Beutler et al, No. 2:2010cv01300 - Document 84 (E.D. Cal. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 72 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 12/20/12 GRANTING 66 Motion for Order Revoking IFP Status; Plaintiff is declared a three-strikes litigant pursuant to section 1915(g); Plaintiff is required to submit the $350.00 filing fee for this action or face dismissal of this action. (Manzer, C)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Thomas v. Beutler et al Doc. 84 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 EDWARD THOMAS, 11 12 13 14 Plaintiff, vs. M. BEUTLER, et al., Defendants. 15 16 No. 2:10-cv-01300 MCE CKD P ORDER / Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action 17 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 18 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 19 On November 7, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 20 herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any 21 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff 22 has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 23 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 24 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 25 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 26 proper analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed November 7, 2012 (Dkt. No. 72) are 3 adopted in full; 4 5 2. Defendant’s motion for order revoking plaintiff’s IFP status (Dkt. No. 66) is granted; 6 3. Plaintiff is declared a three-strikes litigant pursuant to section 1915(g); and 7 4. Plaintiff is now required to submit the $350.00 filing fee for this action or face 8 dismissal of this action, as he has not demonstrated that he faced imminent danger of serious 9 physical injury at the time he filed his complaint.1 10 Dated: December 20, 2012 11 ________________________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR., CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 24 25 26 Plaintiff’s complaint asserts claims against various defendants at High Desert State Prison-Susanville for the use of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment and for an alleged false and retaliatory disciplinary report. At the time plaintiff filed his complaint, plaintiff was incarcerated at the Salinas Valley State Prison-Soledad, which is also his current place of incarceration. (See Dkt. No. 1, Proof of Service.) Plaintiff has not demonstrated that the imminent danger exception applies to his case. 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
