(PC) Peralta v. Swetalla et al, No. 1:2018cv01023 - Document 23 (E.D. Cal. 2019)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 16 Findings and Recommendations and DENYING Defendants' 15 Motion to Revoke Plaintiff's In Forma Pauperis, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/30/2019. (Orozco, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CION PERALTA, 12 13 14 15 16 No. 1:18-cv-01023-DAD-EPG (PC) Plaintiff, v. J. SWETALLA, et al., ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO REVOKE PLAINTIFF’S IN FORMA PAUPERIS Defendants. (Doc. Nos. 15, 16) 17 18 On July 30, 2018, plaintiff Cion Peralta, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, commenced 19 this action by filing a complaint naming defendants J. Swetalla, L. Machado, V. Powers, J. Sebok, 20 and Xavier Cano (collectively “defendants”). (Doc. No. 1.) Therein, plaintiff brings claims 21 under the First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, as well as 22 the Prison Rape Elimination Act and various state laws. 23 On June 21, 2019, defendants filed a motion seeking to revoke plaintiff’s in forma 24 pauperis status and require the prepayment of filing fees, which was referred to a United States 25 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. (Doc. No. 15.) On 26 August 16, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations 27 recommending that defendants’ motion be denied because plaintiff was not proceeding in forma 28 pauperis in this action and had instead paid the filing fee. (Doc. No. 16 at 2.) The findings and 1 1 recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any objections to the 2 findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one (21) days from the date of 3 service. (Id.) The period for filing objections has passed and no objections have been filed. 4 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this 5 court has conducted a de novo review of this matter. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, 6 the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper 7 analysis. 8 Accordingly: 9 1. The findings and recommendations issued on August 26, 2019 (Doc. No. 16) are 10 11 adopted in full; and 2. Defendants’ motion to revoke plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status and require the 12 13 14 15 prepayment of filing fees (Doc. No. 15) is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: December 30, 2019 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
