Flores v. U.S. Department of Justice et al, No. 1:2015cv00538 - Document 7 (D. Haw. 2016)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (ECF NO. 4 ). Signed by JUDGE HELEN GILLMOR on 1/19/2016. (ecs, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Flores v. U.S. Department of Justice et al Doc. 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII XAVIER FLORES - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; ) U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE; FRED ) EDWARDS - SENIOR INSPECTOR ) U.S.M.S., ) ) Defendants. ) _____________________________ ) CIVIL NO. 15-00538 HG-RLP ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF NO. 4) On December 30, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and Recommendation as to Plaintiff Xavier Flores’ (“Plaintiff”) Complaint and Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs. (ECF No. 4). Plaintiff timely filed two responsive documents, entitled “Appeal to proceed without prepaying fees or cost” (ECF No. 5) and “Reconsider Decision” (ECF No. 6). The Court construes these filings as objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation. The Court reviews those portions of the Findings and Recommendation to which Plaintiff objects de novo. 636(b)(1). 28 U.S.C. § The portions to which Plaintiff does not object are reviewed for clear error. Stow v. Murashige, 288 F.Supp.2d 1122, 1127 (D. Haw. 2003). 1 Dockets.Justia.com Plaintiff’s filings are difficult to understand and do not add any new information that would change the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning, as put forth in the Findings and Recommendation. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 74.2, the Findings and Recommendation (ECF No. 4) are adopted as the opinion and order of this Court. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, January 19, 2016. /s/ Helen Gillmor Helen Gillmor United States District Judge 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.
