From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Anderson v. Tate

United States District Court, E.D. California
Dec 13, 2010
No. CIV S-10-2487 GGH (E.D. Cal. Dec. 13, 2010)

Opinion

No. CIV S-10-2487 GGH.

December 13, 2010


ORDER


Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

On November 5, 2010, plaintiff filed a motion (Doc. 12) to have his legal property returned. However, the court has not screened the complaint as plaintiff has yet to file an application to proceed in forma pauperis, as plaintiff requested an extension to file the application, which was granted.

Plaintiff's motion for the return of his legal property is vacated, but plaintiff may bring the motion in the future should he file the in forma pauperis application and if the court find that plaintiff has cognizeable claims.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for the return of his legal property (Doc. 12) is vacated.

DATED: December 13, 2010


Summaries of

Anderson v. Tate

United States District Court, E.D. California
Dec 13, 2010
No. CIV S-10-2487 GGH (E.D. Cal. Dec. 13, 2010)
Case details for

Anderson v. Tate

Case Details

Full title:SAMUEL ANDERSON Plaintiff, v. MATTHEW TATE, et. al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Dec 13, 2010

Citations

No. CIV S-10-2487 GGH (E.D. Cal. Dec. 13, 2010)