Peralta v. Swetalla

Full title: CION PERALTA, Plaintiff, v. J. SWETALLA, et al., Defendants.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Dec 30, 2019

No. 1:18-cv-01023-DAD-EPG (PC) (E.D. Cal. Dec. 30, 2019)

Opinion

No. 1:18-cv-01023-DAD-EPG (PC)

12-30-2019

CION PERALTA, Plaintiff, v. J. SWETALLA, et al., Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO REVOKE PLAINTIFF'S IN FORMA PAUPERIS

(Doc. Nos. 15, 16)

On July 30, 2018, plaintiff Cion Peralta, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, commenced this action by filing a complaint naming defendants J. Swetalla, L. Machado, V. Powers, J. Sebok, and Xavier Cano (collectively "defendants"). (Doc. No. 1.) Therein, plaintiff brings claims under the First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, as well as the Prison Rape Elimination Act and various state laws.

On June 21, 2019, defendants filed a motion seeking to revoke plaintiff's in forma pauperis status and require the prepayment of filing fees, which was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. (Doc. No. 15.) On August 16, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that defendants' motion be denied because plaintiff was not proceeding in forma pauperis in this action and had instead paid the filing fee. (Doc. No. 16 at 2.) The findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one (21) days from the date of service. (Id.) The period for filing objections has passed and no objections have been filed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this matter. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly:

1. The findings and recommendations issued on August 26, 2019 (Doc. No. 16) are adopted in full; and

2. Defendants' motion to revoke plaintiff's in forma pauperis status and require the prepayment of filing fees (Doc. No. 15) is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 30 , 2019

/s/_________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE