Goolsby v. Gonzales et al

Filing 44

ORDER Adopting 37 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER DENYING Defendant Steadman's 31 Motion to Declare Plaintiff a Vexatious Litigant and Require Payment of Security; ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's 36 Motion for Stay and to Conduct Discovery, or in the Alternative, for Extension of Time; ORDER REQUIRING Defendant Steadman to File Answer within Thirty Days signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 7/15/2014. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

THOMAS GOOLSBY,

12
13
14
15

1:11-cv-00394-LJO-GSA-PC

Plaintiff,

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
(Doc. 37.)

vs.

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT
STEADMAN’S MOTION TO DECLARE
PLAINTIFF A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT
AND REQUIRE PAYMENT OF SECURITY
(Doc. 31.)

FERNANDO GONZALES, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR STAY AND TO CONDUCT
DISCOVERY, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE,
FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
(Doc. 36.)

18
19
20

ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANT
STEADMAN TO FILE ANSWER WITHIN
THIRTY DAYS

21
22
23

Thomas Goolsby (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights

24

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

25

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

26

On May 29, 2014, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending that

27

Defendant Steadman’s (“Defendant”) motion to declare Plaintiff a vexatious litigant and

28

require payment of security, and Plaintiff’s motion for stay and to conduct discovery, or in the
1

1

alternative, for extension of time, be denied.

2

opportunity to file objections to the findings and recommendations within thirty days. On June

3

26, 2014, Defendant filed objections. (Doc. 43.) To date, Plaintiff has not filed objections or

4

otherwise responded to the findings and recommendations.

(Doc. 37.)

The parties were provided an

5

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this

6

Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file,

7

including Defendant’s objections, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be

8

supported by the record and proper analysis.

9
10

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:
1.

11
12

2014, are ADOPTED IN FULL; and
2.

13
14

3.

Plaintiff’s motion for stay and to conduct discovery, or in the alternative, for
extension of time, filed on May 21, 2014, is DENIED;

4.

17
18

Defendant Steadman’s motion to declare Plaintiff a vexatious litigant and
require payment of security, filed on April 17, 2014, is DENIED;

15
16

The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on May 29,

Within thirty days from the date of service of this order, Defendant Steadman is
required to file an Answer to the Complaint; and

5.

This case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.

19
20
21

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

July 15, 2014

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2