(PC) Hickman v. Chisholm et al, No. 2:2019cv01725 - Document 10 (E.D. Cal. 2019)
Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 12/5/2019 ADOPTING the findings and recommendations issued 11/4/2019 (ECF No. 9 ) in full; In light of the duplicative nature of the complaint (see generally ECF No. 9 ), in the interests of e conomy and fairness, plaintiff' motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2 ) is also duplicative and therefore DENIED as moot; Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED without leave to amend for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1); andthe clerk of court is directed to close this case. CASE CLOSED. (Becknal, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Hickman v. Chisholm et al Doc. 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KEVIN DUANE HICKMAN, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:19-cv-1725 KJM DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER MATT CHISHOLM, et al., Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided 19 by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On November 4, 2019, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, which 21 were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 9). Plaintiff has not filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations the magistrate judge issued after vacating her 24 original finding and recommendations. 25 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 26 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 27 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 28 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 2 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations issued November 4, 2019 (ECF No. 9) are 5 6 ADOPTED in full; 2. In light of the duplicative nature of the complaint (see generally ECF No. 9), in the 7 interests of economy and fairness, plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is 8 also duplicative and therefore DENIED as moot; 9 3. Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED without leave to amend for failure to state a claim 10 upon which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1); and 11 4. The clerk of court is directed to close this case. 12 DATED: December 5, 2019. 13 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
