(PC) Ruiz v. Woodfill et al

Filing 17

ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 7/8/2020 ORDERING that the adoption of the Findings and Recommendations (ECF No. 8 ) is AFFIRMED and plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. (Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ROGELIO MAY RUIZ,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:20-cv-0205 KJM AC P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

D. WOODFILL, et al.,
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 as provided

19

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

20

On February 3, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations that

21

recommended that plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis be denied. ECF No. 4.

22

Plaintiff did not file any objections and the findings and recommendations were adopted in full.

23

ECF No. 8. He then sought reconsideration of the order adopting the findings and

24

recommendations (ECF No. 9) and was given another opportunity to file objections (ECF

25

No. 12). Prior to the order granting plaintiff another opportunity to file objections to the

26

February 3, 2020 findings and recommendations, the magistrate judge issued additional findings

27

and recommendations and recommended the case be dismissed for failure to pay the filing fee.

28

ECF No. 11. After plaintiff filed a motion for an unspecified extension of time to file objections,
1

1

the court granted him until June 1, 2020, to file objections to both the February 3, 2020 and April

2

20, 2020 findings and recommendations. ECF No. 14. Plaintiff filed objections to the February

3

3, 2020 findings and recommendations (ECF No. 15), but it does not appear that he has objected

4

to the April 20, 2020 findings and recommendations and the time for doing so has passed

5

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

6

court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court finds the

7

February 3, 2020 findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper

8

analysis, while deferring action on the April 20, 2020 findings and recommendations pending

9

clarification from the magistrate judge whether those findings and recommendations are now

10

before this court for resolution.

11

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the adoption of the February 3, 2020

12

findings and recommendations (ECF No. 8) is affirmed and plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma

13

pauperis is denied.

14

DATED: July 8, 2020.

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