(PC) Roberts v. State of California et al, No. 1:2022cv00131 - Document 12 (E.D. Cal. 2022)

Court Description: ORDER DENYING 2 Motion to Proceed IFP; ORDER ADOPTING 11 Findings and Recommendations; this matter is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings consistent with this order, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 05/06/2022. (Pay Filing Fee in full within 30-Day Deadline)(Martin-Gill, S)
Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DAVID ROBERTS, 12 13 14 15 16 17 No. 1:22-cv-00131-DAD-HBK (PC) Plaintiff, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS Defendants. (Doc. Nos. 2, 11) Plaintiff David Roberts is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action 18 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 19 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On April 13, 2022, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations 21 recommending that plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2) be denied 22 because: (1) he is subject to the three strikes bar under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); and (2) the 23 allegations of plaintiff’s complaint do not satisfy the “imminent danger of serious physical injury” 24 exception to § 1915(g). (Doc. No. 11.) The magistrate judge also recommended that plaintiff be 25 ordered to pay the required $402.00 filing fee in full in order to proceed with this action. (Id. at 26 7.) The findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any 27 objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id.) To date, no 28 objections have been filed, and the time in which to do so has since passed. 1 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the undersigned has 2 conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 3 undersigned concludes that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and 4 proper analysis. 5 Accordingly, 6 1. 7 The findings and recommendations issued on April 13, 2022 (Doc. No. 11) are adopted; 8 2. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2) is denied; 9 3. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, plaintiff shall pay the 10 11 $402.00 filing fee in full in order to proceed with this action; 4. 12 13 will result in the dismissal of this action; and 5. 14 15 16 Plaintiff is forewarned that failure to pay the filing fee within the specified time This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings consistent with this order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 6, 2022 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2