Davis v. Kelso et al

Filing 20

ORDER STAYING 15 Order to Show Cause until Court of Appeals Resolves Relevant Case in Question signed by Magistrate Judge Gerald B. Cohn on 5/10/2011. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
CHARLES T. DAVIS,

1:10-cv-01184-LJO-GBC (PC)

11
Plaintiff,
12

ORDER STAYING ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE UNTIL COURT OF APPEALS
RESOLVES RELEVANT CASE IN QUESTION

v.
13
CLARK J. KELSO, et. al.,
14

(Doc. 15)
Defendants.

15
/
16
17

Charles T. Davis (“Plaintiff’) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

18

(“IFP”) in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action was filed on July 1,

19

2010. (Doc. 1). On April 22, 2011, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause as to why Plaintiff’s

20

IFP status should not be revoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). (Doc. 15). On May 4, 2011,

21

Plaintiff filed a response. (Doc. 18). In the response, Plaintiff correctly observed that Davis v.

22

Swartz, et al., 2:01-cv-00827-WBS-PAN (PC) (E.D. Cal.), does not count as a strike since it was

23

removed from state court to federal court by defendants. Additionally, Plaintiff argues that since

24

Davis v. George, 1:10-cv-00210-OWW-GSA (PC) (E.D. Cal.), is still on appeal, the Court should

25

not count that case as a strike. (Doc. 18).

26

///

27

///

28

///
1

1
2

Therefore, the Court will stay any decision regarding the Order to Show Cause until the
appellate court resolves Davis v. George.1

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5
6

Dated:
0jh02o

May 10, 2011
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The Court will address arguments regarding whether Davis v. Alameida, et al., No. 05-17055 (9th Cir.
dismissed March 2, 2006) and Davis v. Swartz, et al., No. 02-15969 (9th Cir. dismissed July 19, 2009) count as
strikes, when the Court returns to resolving the Order to Show Cause in its entirety.

2