Lugo v. Moore et al
ORDER ADOPTING AND ACCEPTING ECF No.  Report and Recommendation : Plaintiff's IFP Application (ECF No. 4 ) is GRANTED. Clerk shall file Plaintiff's Complaint (ECF No. 1 -1). This action is DISMISSED. The Clerk of the Court shall close this case. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 8/22/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
FERNANDO ERIK LUGO,
CASE NO.: 3:17-CV-00394-RCJ-WGC
TRAVIS MOORE (OWNER), et al.,
Before the Court is the Reports and Recommendations of U.S. Magistrate Judge (ECF #51)
entered on August 2, 2017, recommending that the Court grant Plaintiff’s IFP Application (ECF No. 4);
however, Plaintiff should be required to pay an initial partial filing fee in the amount of $16.10.
Thereafter, whenever his prison account exceeds $10, he should be required to make monthly payments
in the amount of twenty percent of the preceding month’s income credited to his account until the filing
fee is paid; the Complaint (ECF No. 1-1) should be filed and this action should be dismissed.
August 16, 2017, Plaintiff filed his Objection to Report and Recommendation Regarding Motion for
Summary Judgment (ECF No. 6).
The Court has conducted it’s de novo review in this case, has fully considered the objections of
the Plaintiff, the pleadings and memoranda of the parties and other relevant matters of record pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule IB 3-2. The Court determines that the Magistrate Judge’s
Reports and Recommendation (ECF #5) entered on August 2, 2017, should be ADOPTED AND
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the Plaintiff’s IFP Application (ECF No. 4) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall file Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED. The Clerk of the Court shall close
IT IS SO ORDERED this 22nd day of August, 2017.
ROBERT C. JONES
Refers to court’s docket number.
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?