From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hutchens v. United States

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Feb 12, 2010
CIV S-10-232 FCD KJM PS (E.D. Cal. Feb. 12, 2010)

Opinion


JOHN HUTCHENS, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. No. CIV S-10-232 FCD KJM PS. United States District Court, E.D. California. February 12, 2010

          ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

          KIMBERLY MUELLER, Magistrate Judge.

         In this action, plaintiff is proceeding in propria persona. Plaintiff, who requests leave to proceed in forma pauperis, has filed a document that appears to be an attempt to file a motion to intervene in a pending case, United States of America v. Iron Mountain Mines, Inc., (E. D. Cal), Case No. 2:91-CV-0768 JAM JFM. In that case, Judge Mendez issued an order forbidding John Hutchens from filing any more documents in the case unless he was represented by an attorney. See Docket no. 1275, filed January 5, 2009. In the present action, there appears to be no independent basis for federal jurisdiction with respect to plaintiff's claims. The clear gravamen of plaintiff's complaint is intervention in the Iron Mountain Mines action. It appears plaintiff opened a new civil action simply to avoid the prohibition of Judge Mendez's order.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is denied.

         IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed and the case closed.

         These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within seven days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).


Summaries of

Hutchens v. United States

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Feb 12, 2010
CIV S-10-232 FCD KJM PS (E.D. Cal. Feb. 12, 2010)
Case details for

Hutchens v. United States

Case Details

Full title:JOHN HUTCHENS, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

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

Date published: Feb 12, 2010

Citations

CIV S-10-232 FCD KJM PS (E.D. Cal. Feb. 12, 2010)