Flores v. United States Attorney General et al, No. 1:2015cv00644 - Document 6 (D. Or. 2015)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation 4 is adopted in full. Plaintiffs motion to transfer to multidistrict litigation 1 is DENIED, and plaintiffs application for leave to proceed IFP 2 , is DENIED. Ordered by Judge Michael J. McShane. (cp)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Flores v. United States Attorney General et al Doc. 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON ERIC FLORES, Plaintiff, Civ. No. 1:15-cv-00644-CL OPINION AND ORDER V. UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL and FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Defendants. MCSHANE, Judge: Plaintiff, pro se, seeks to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in this action alleging that an "organized group of executive employees of the federal government" used "advanced technology with a direct signal to a satellite in outerspace [sic]" to violate his rights under the First Amendment. Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke issued a Report and Recommendation on April 24, 2015, in which he recommended that this Court dismiss plaintiffs complaint as frivolous. The matter is now before this Court. 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1)(B); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Because no objections to the Report and Recommendation were timely filed, this Court reviews only the legal principles de novo. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en bane); see also United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1444--45 (9th Cir. 1988) (citations omitted). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, this Court finds no error in Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation, ECF No.4. 1 -OPINION AND ORDER Dockets.Justia.com CONCLUSION This Court ADOPTS Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation, ECF No.4, in full. Accordingly, plaintiffs motion to transfer to multidistrict litigation, ECF No. 1-3, is DENIED, and plaintiffs application for leave to proceed IFP, ECF No.2, is DENIED IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 12th day of May, 2015. L Michael J. McShane United States District Judge 2 - OPINION AND ORDER
]]>
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.
