LongJaw v. Young

Filing 9

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7 in full. 5 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Timothy J. LongJaw is DENIED, and the Complaint 2 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Donald W. Molloy on 4/18/2011. Mailed to LongJaw. (TAG, )

J::-/{~

#>~ 4,» /8

()

8y ~IC-t
<0//
~ ~DI.J.
-'<fIY
:I'''''y
Ci.€
. c{~

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
MISSOULA DIVISION
TIMOTHY LONG JAW,
Plaintiff,
vs.
BRIAN YOUNG,
Defendant.

1i>1r;.trf.s~ Ii'Ir
-"'4

CV 11-25-M-DWM-JCL

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

)
)

Plaintiff Timothy Long Jaw filed a proposed Complaint and Motion to
Proceed in Forma Pauperis in this action on February 4, 2011. United States
Magistrate Judge Jeremiah C. Lynch entered Findings and Recommendation on
March 15,2011, and found that Long Jaw cannot establish either diversity or
federal question jurisdiction. Judge Lynch accordingly recommended denying
Long Jaw's Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis and dismissing the proposed
Complaint. Plaintiff did not timely objecf to the Findings and Recommendation,

'Plaintiff did file a notice dated Mareh, 14, 2011, the day before the Findings and
Recommendation was filed. (See dkt #8). The notice requests more "insight" on how to proceed
in forma pauperis. The Court presumes the Findings and Recommendation provided the
requested information.
·1·

and so has waived the right to de novo review ofthe record. 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(I). This Court will review the Findings and Recommendation for clear
error. McDonnell Douglas Com. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309,
1313 (9th Cir. 1981). Clear error exists if the Court is left with a "definite and
firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." United States v. Syrax,235
F.3d 422,427 (9th Cir. 2000).
After a review of Judge Lynch's Findings and Recommendation, I find no
such error. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Judge Lynch's Findings and
Recommendation (dkt #7) is adopted in full. The Motion to Proceed in Forma
Pauperis (dkt #5) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Complaint is DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack ofjurisdiction.
V.

Dated this Jf{day of April, 2011.

/
/
olloy, District Judge
District Court
I

(
-2­