Williams v. Hamad, et al.
Filing
15
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 4/25/2014 ADOPTING IN FULL 13 Findings and Recommendations; DENYING 9 Motion to Proceed IFP; REMINDING the plaintiff that a failure to pay the filing fee will result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed. (Michel, G)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
LONNIE WILLIAMS,
12
No. 2:14-cv-0044 TLN KJN P
Plaintiff,
13
v.
14
HAMAD, et al.,
15
ORDER
Defendants.
16
17
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief
18
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to
19
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On March 27, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein
20
21
which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the
22
findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed
23
objections to the findings and recommendations.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this
24
25
court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the
26
court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper
27
analysis.
28
/////
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1. The findings and recommendations filed March 27, 2014, are adopted in full; and
3
2. Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 9) is denied; plaintiff
4
shall pay the filing fee within 28 days of the date of this order. Failure to pay the filing fee will
5
result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed.
6
Dated: April 25, 2014
7
8
Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge
9
10
11
12
/will0044.804
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?