Williams v. Bell et al

Filing 34

ORDER adopting Findings and Recommendations 30 , denying Defendants' Motion to declare Plaintiff a vexatious litigant 19 and denying Plaintiff's Motion to strike a reply as unnecessary 29 signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 3/8/2018. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOHN WESLEY WILLIAMS,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

C. BELL, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16

Case No. 1:16-cv-01584-LJO-SAB (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DECLARE
PLAINTIFF A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT AND
DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE A
REPLY AS UNNECESSARY
(Doc. Nos. 19, 29, 30)

Plaintiff John Wesley Williams is appearing pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42

17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

U.S.C. § 1983.

19

The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

20

636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On November 30, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and

21

Recommendation recommending that Defendants’ motion to declare Plaintiff a vexatious litigant be

22

denied. The Findings and Recommendation was served on the parties and contained notice that

23

objections were to be filed within thirty days. No objections were filed and the time period to do has

24

expired.

25

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de

26

novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and

27

Recommendation to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

28

///
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1.

The Findings and Recommendation, filed on November 30, 2017, is adopted in full;

3

2.

Defendants’ motion to declare Plaintiff a vexatious litigant is denied;

4

3.

Plaintiff’s motion to strike the filing of a reply is denied as unnecessary because no

5
6
7

reply was filed by Defendants; and
4.

Within twenty (20) days from the date of service of this order, Defendants shall file a

further response to Plaintiff’s complaint.

8
9
10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____

March 8, 2018

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2