(PC) Van Huisen v. Chief of Staff et al

Filing 24

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 6/4/2024 RECOMMENDING the 5 , 7 , 11 , 21 Motions be denied as moot. Referred to Judge Dale A. Drozd. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations. (Kyono, V)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GREGORY SCOTT VAN HUSIEN,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
CHIEF OF STAFF,

Case No. 2:23-cv-02815-DAD-JDP (PC)
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
PLAINTIFF’S OUTSTANDING MOTIONS
BE DENIED AS MOOT AND THAT THE
CLERK OF COURT BE DIRECTED TO
CLOSE THIS MATTER

Defendant.
OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN
DAYS

16
17
18

Plaintiff is a “Three-Striker” within the meaning of Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Van

19

Huisen v. DeSantis, No. 2:23-cv-01758-WBS-KJN (E.D. Cal.) (dismissed for failure to state a

20

claim); Van Huisen v. Clinton Administration, No. 2:23-cv-01596-DJC-KJN (E.D. Cal.)

21

(dismissed for failure to state a claim); Van Husisen v. Joseph R. Biden, No. 2:23-cv-00944-DJC-

22

EFB (E.D. Cal.) (dismissed for failure to state a claim). Accordingly, on March 5, 2024, I

23

recommended that plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis be denied. ECF No. 14.

24

Plaintiff was allowed fourteen days to file objections. Id. at 3. I also recommended that plaintiff

25

be directed to tender the filing fee within thirty days of any order adopting these

26

recommendations. Id.

27
28

Plaintiff filed objections but did not tender the filing fee. ECF No. 15. On April 3, 2024,
the district judge adopted the findings and recommendations and ordered plaintiff to tender the
1

1

filing fee within thirty days. ECF No. 20. The district judge referred the matter back to me for

2

further pre-trial proceedings. Id.

3
4

The deadline imposed by the court to tender the filing fee has expired, and plaintiff has
neither tendered the filing fee nor otherwise responded to the court’s orders.

5

Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that:

6

1. Plaintiff’s outstanding motions, ECF Nos. 5, 7, 11, & 21, be denied as moot; and

7

2. The Clerk of Court be directed to close this matter.

8

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

9

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days

10

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

11

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

12

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the

13

objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The

14

parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to

15

appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez

16

v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.

19
Dated:

June 4, 2024

20

JEREMY D. PETERSON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2