(PC) Stribling v. Lewis, No. 2:2017cv02009 - Document 24 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 10/31/18 ADOPTING in full 23 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DENYING Defendant's 15 motion for the revocation of plaintiff's in forma pauperis status. This matter is REFERRED back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial proceedings.(Kastilahn, A)

Download PDF
(PC) Stribling v. Lewis Doc. 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 AARON LAMONT STRIBLING, 11 12 13 14 No. 2:17-cv-2009-KJM-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER LEWIS, Defendant. 15 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 17 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 18 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 19 On July 12, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 20 served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings 21 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed objections to 22 the findings and recommendations. 23 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 24 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 25 Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 26 magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”). 27 Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 28 the record and by the proper analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed July 12, 2018, are adopted in full; 3 2. Defendant’s January 29, 2018 motion for the revocation of plaintiff’s in forma pauperis 4 5 status is DENIED; and 3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial 6 proceedings. 7 DATED: October 31, 2018. 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.