Willrich v. The United States et al

Filing 70

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE re: 10 Findings and Recommendations on Case re: 3 Complaint, filed by Candace Willrich. Plaintiff's motions are DENIED. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is summarily DISMISSED with prejudice as frivolous, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), and that Plaintiff is BARRED from filing future in forma pauperis actions in this Court without first seeking leave to file. In addition, in light of t he unwarranted number of abusive filings in this case, Plaintiff is DENIED the opportunity to file electronically in this case and any future cases Plaintiff may file in this District. The Court CERTIFIES that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 8/20/2013) (tla)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
CANDACE WILLRICH,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§

3:13-CV-2670-M-BK

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The United States Magistrate Judge made Findings, Conclusions, and a Recommendation
in this case. Plaintiff filed objections and over fifty motions/other filings reiterating her
fantastical and delusional claims and seeking recusal, sanctions, and injunctive relief. The
District Court has made a de novo review of those portions of the proposed findings and
recommendation to which objection was made. The objections are overruled and the Court
ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate
Judge. Plaintiff’s motions are DENIED.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is summarily DISMISSED with
prejudice as frivolous, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), and that Plaintiff is BARRED from filing
future in forma pauperis actions in this Court without first seeking leave to file. In addition, in
light of the unwarranted number of abusive filings in this case, Plaintiff is DENIED the
opportunity to file electronically in this case and any future cases Plaintiff may file in this
District.
The Court CERTIFIES that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good
faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). In support of this finding, the Court adopts and incorporates
by reference the Magistrate Judge’s Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation. See Baugh v.

Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 n.21 (5th Cir. 1997). Based on the Findings and Recommendation,
the Court finds that any appeal of this action would present no legal point of arguable merit and
would, therefore, be frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983).
SO ORDERED.
August 20, 2013.