-KJN (PC) Vaught v. Sandoval et al, No. 2:2010cv01558 - Document 47 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER adopting in full 38 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/7/11. Defendant's 32 motion to dismiss and to revoke plaintiff's in forma pauperis status is DENIED. (Kastilahn, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-KJN (PC) Vaught v. Sandoval et al Doc. 47 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ELBERT LEE VAUGHT, IV, Plaintiff, 11 vs. 12 13 No. 2:10-cv-1558-KJM-KJN-P E. SANDOVAL, et al., Defendants. 14 ORDER / 15 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action 16 17 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 18 Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On March 31, 2011, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, 19 20 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 21 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. Neither party has 22 filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The court thus presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 23 24 United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 25 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 26 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 1983). Having carefully reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to 2 be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 31, 2011, are adopted in full. 5 2. Defendant’s motion to dismiss and to revoke plaintiff’s in forma pauperis 6 status (ECF 32) is denied. 7 DATED: September 7, 2011. 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 /vaug1558.801 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.
