Million v. Green Wall Guards et al

Filing 4

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 2/4/2008 recommending that this action be dismissed re 1 Complaint filed by Charlie Lee Million. Objections to F&R due w/in 20 days. (Matson, R)

(PC) Million v. Green Wall Guards et al

Doc. 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. GREEN WALL GUARDS, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff is a state inmate, who sent a letter to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, which was in turn transferred to this district. Plaintiff has filed neither a civil rights complaint nor a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. In the letter, plaintiff complains that he does not belong in California State Prison­Sacramento, which is a maximum security institution, and that the "Green Wall" guards are blocking his transfer to California State Prison­Los Angeles. However, in Million v. Vasconcellos, Civ. No. S-03-0054 LKK GGH P, the court found plaintiff had "struck out" within the meaning of the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). This court may take judicial notice of the records of other cases. United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119-20 (9th Cir. 1980). When an inmate has "struck out," the court must determine whether plaintiff's complaint shows he is "under imminent 1
Dockets.Justia.com

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CHARLIE LEE MILLION, Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-2218 MCE KJM P

FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

danger of serious physical injury" before permitting him to proceed without prepayment of costs. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Plaintiff's exceedingly vague allegations do not satisfy this standard. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). DATED: February 4, 2008.

2 mill2218.56

2