(PS) King v. Mayopoulos et al, No. 2:2017cv02342 - Document 4 (E.D. Cal. 2017)

Court Description: ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 11/15/17 ORDERING that Plaintiff's Request to proceed in forma pauperis 2 is GRANTED; and IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed re 1 Complaint. These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to U.S. District Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections to these F&Rs due within fourteen days. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KEVIN EUGENE KING, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:17-cv-02342 TLN CKD v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TIMOTHY J. MAYOPOULOUS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, proceeding in this action pro se, has requested leave to proceed in forma 18 pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 19 302(21), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff has submitted an affidavit making the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 20 21 1915(a)(1). Accordingly, the request to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted. In this action, plaintiff challenges an unlawful detainer action presently being taken 22 23 against him in state court. (See ECF No. 1 at 9.) Because the unlawful detainer action was filed 24 in state court prior to the initiation of the instant federal court action and both actions involve 25 precisely the same property, this court is required to abstain from exercising jurisdiction. See 26 Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States, 424 U.S. 800 (1976); see also 27 Scherbenske v. Wachovia Mortgage, FSB, 626 F.Supp.2d 1052, 1057-1058 (E. D. Cal. 2009). 28 //// 1 1 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is granted; and 3 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. 4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 5 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 6 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 7 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 8 "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any reply to the objections 9 shall be served and filed within seven days after service of the objections. The parties are advised 10 that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 11 Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 12 Dated: November 15, 2017 _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 2 / king2342.unlawfuldetainer 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.