Pridgen v. Parez et al
Filing
9
ORDER Accepting 6 Report and Recommendation. Denying with prejudice 3 Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. This action is dismissed. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 2/26/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR) (Main Document 9 replaced on 2/26/2013) (SLR).
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
8
***
9
JOHN PRIDGEN,
Plaintiff,
10
11
Case No. 2:12-cv-01354-MMD-PAL
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION (dkt. no. 6)
v.
12
V. PAREZ, et al.,
13
Defendants.
14
15
16
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable Peggy A.
Leen, United States Magistrate Judge, entered January 22, 2013. (Dkt. no. 6.)
17
The Court previously denied Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis
18
because it could not determine whether Plaintiff was a patient or inmate at Northern
19
Nevada Hills Mental Health Services. (Dkt. no. 2.) Plaintiff was directed to clearly state
20
whether or not he was incarcerated in any second application. Plaintiff filed a second
21
application, but again did not state whether or not he is incarcerated. He submitted the
22
form application for individuals who are not incarcerated. The application, however,
23
states that Plaintiff is incarcerated at 500 Galetti Way, Sparks, Nevada, the address for
24
the Northern Nevada Hills Mental Health Services. Moreover, Plaintiff did not provide
25
the required financial affidavit or statements from any inmate trust accounts as the Court
26
asked for in its previous order. The Magistrate Judge accordingly recommends that
27
Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis be denied with prejudice, as it is
28
impossible for the Court to determine whether Plaintiff is eligible to proceed in forma
1
pauperis.1
2
(Dkt. no. 6.)
3
4
The Magistrate Judge also recommends dismissing Plaintiff’s Complaint.
Plaintiff did not file an objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation, but instead filed an Amended Complaint (dkt. no. 7).
5
The Court has conducted a de novo review of the record in this case in
6
accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule IB 3-2, and determines that
7
Magistrate Judge Leen’s Report and Recommendation (dkt. no. 6) should be
8
ACCEPTED.
9
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in Forma
10
Pauperis (dkt. no. 4) is DENIED WITH PREJUDICE. This action is dismissed. The Clerk
11
of the Court is HEREBY ORDERED to close the case.
12
ENTERED this 26th day of February 2013.
13
14
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
In addition, Plaintiff has not appraised the Court of his new address pursuant to
Local Special Rule 2-2. The Report and Recommendation was returned as
undeliverable. (Dkt. no. 8.)
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
