(PC) Hubbs v. Mayberg et al, No. 1:2010cv02218 - Document 11 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER VACATING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS of January 20, 2011 8 ; ORDER GRANTING Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis 10 , signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 1/28/11. (Hellings, J)

Download PDF
(PC) Hubbs v. Mayberg et al Doc. 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NORMAN HUBBS, 12 13 14 15 1:10-cv-02218-GSA-PC Plaintiff, ORDER VACATING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF JANUARY 20, 2011 (Doc. 8.) vs. STEPHEN MAYBERG, et al., ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS (Doc. 10.) Defendants. 16 / 17 18 Norman Hubbs (“Plaintiff”) is a civil detainee proceeding pro se in this civil rights 19 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 20, 2011, findings and recommendations 20 were entered, to dismiss this action based on Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s 21 order of December 2, 2010 which ordered him to submit a non-prisoner application to proceed 22 in forma pauperis within thirty days. (Doc. 8.) On January 27, 2011, Plaintiff filed objections 23 to the findings and recommendations, together with a completed application to proceed in 24 forma pauperis on the Court’s form. (Docs. 9, 10.) Due to Plaintiff’s response, the Court 25 finds good cause to vacate the findings and recommendations. In addition, because Plaintiff 26 has submitted a declaration that makes the showing required by § 1915(a), the application to 27 proceed in forma pauperis shall be granted. 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. 3 4 VACATED; and 2. 5 6 7 The findings and recommendation entered on January 20, 2011, are Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, filed on January 27, 2011, is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 220hhe January 28, 2011 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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.