(PC) Dawson v. Commissioner of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al, No. 1:2015cv01867 - Document 24 (E.D. Cal. 2016)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 19 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and Denying 14 Motion to Revoke in Forma Pauperis Status, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/8/16. (Verduzco, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ISAAC DA’BOUR DAWSON, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 1:15-cv-01867-DAD-GSA (PC) v. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING MOTION TO REVOKE IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS CDCR, et al., 15 Defendants. (Doc. Nos. 14, 19) 16 17 Plaintiff Isaac Da’Bour Dawson is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 18 19 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. Nos. 1, 6.) The matter 20 was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local 21 Rule 302. On June 15, 2016, defendants Gonzalez, Guzman, Johnson, and Sheldon filed a motion to 22 23 revoke plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). (Doc. No. 14.) On July 24 25, 2016, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that 25 defendants’ motion to revoke plaintiff’s in forma pauperis be denied. (Doc. No. 19.) On August 26 22, 2016, defendants filed objections to those findings and recommendations and a request for 27 judicial notice. (Doc. Nos. 21, 22.) 28 ///// 1 1 In their objections to the findings and recommendations, defendants argue that the 2 magistrate judge mistakenly determined that the prior dismissal of one of plaintiff’s previous 3 lawsuits, Dawson v. Sacramento County Jail, No. 2:12-cv-00963-JAM-GGH (E.D. Cal. Oct. 10, 4 2012), did not count as a strike, even though the underlying reason for that dismissal was 5 plaintiff’s failure to state a claim. (Doc. No. 21 at 1.) 6 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this 7 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, 8 including defendants’ objections and request for judicial notice, the court finds the findings and 9 recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. The magistrate judge 10 properly concluded that the dismissal without prejudice in Dawson v. Sacramento County Jail 11 was based upon plaintiff’s failure to keep the court apprised of his address and that dismissal 12 without prejudice on that basis did not support an inference that plaintiff could not state a 13 cognizable claim. (Doc. No. 19 at 3–4.) 14 15 16 17 18 19 Accordingly, 1) The findings and recommendations filed July 25, 2016 (Doc. No. 19), are adopted in full; and 2) Defendants’ motion to revoke plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status (Doc. No. 14) is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 8, 2016 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.