Hunter v. Valdez et al

Filing 7

ORDER WITHDRAWING 5 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION: Hunter has now filed objections to the FCR, questioning the number of "strikes" against him for purposes of Section 1915(g), and he has renewed his request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. See Dkt. No. 6 . The FCR is WITHDRAWN to allow the undersigned to consider, in the first instance, Hunter's claims concerning the correct number of "strikes." (Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L Horan on 1/5/2017) (mcrd)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION JOSEPH WAYNE HUNTER (TDCJ No. 1981619), § § § Plaintiff, § § V. § § LUPE VALDEZ, Dallas County Sheriff, § ET AL., § § Defendants. § No. 3:16-cv-3346-M-BN ORDER WITHDRAWING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION This pro se action has been referred to the undersigned United States magistrate judge for pretrial management under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and a standing order of reference from Chief Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn. On December 5, 2016, the undersigned entered findings of fact, conclusions of law, and a recommendation that the Court should summarily dismiss this action without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) unless Plaintiff Joseph Wayne Hunter pays the full filing fee of $400.00 within the time for filing objections to this recommendation or by some other deadline established by the Court. See Dkt. No. 5 (the “FCR”). Hunter has now filed objections to the FCR, questioning the number of “strikes” against him for purposes of Section 1915(g), and he has renewed his request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. See Dkt. No. 6. -1- The FCR is WITHDRAWN to allow the undersigned to consider, in the first instance, Hunter’s claims concerning the correct number of “strikes.” SO ORDERED. DATED: January 5, 2017 _________________________________________ DAVID L. HORAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE -2-

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?