Opinion
No. 1:19-cv-01179-DAD-JLT (PC)
04-27-2020
JESSE L. YOUNGBLOOD, Plaintiff, v. ESQUERRA, Correctional Officer at Corcoran State Prison, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND ORDERING PLAINTIFF TO PAY THE REQUIRED FILING FEE IN ORDER TO PROCEED WITH THIS ACTION
(Doc. Nos. 4, 5)
Plaintiff Jesse L. Youngblood is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On February 10, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that plaintiff be ordered to pay the required filing fee in full. (Doc. No. 4.) The magistrate judge concluded that because plaintiff has accumulated at least three prior "strikes" under the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA") and had nor alleged facts indicating that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time he filed his complaint, he is not eligible ///// ///// to proceed in forma pauperis. (Id. at 1-3.) The findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days of service. (Id.) On February 24, 2020, plaintiff filed both a motion for an extension of time to file objections and his objections to the pending findings and recommendations. (Doc. Nos. 5, 6.)
The court notes that plaintiff did not submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis but nonetheless appeared to allege in his complaint that he was in imminent danger of harm. (Doc. No. 1 at 9.) Accordingly, the magistrate judge considered and rejected plaintiff's eligibility to proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)'s "imminent danger of serious physical injury" exception based upon the allegations of his complaint. (Doc. No. 4 at 3.) --------
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, the court has conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including plaintiff's objections, the court concludes that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.
In his objections, plaintiff simply restates his belief that he is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis in this action but fails to present any facts or analysis that meaningfully respond to the magistrate judge's reasoned analysis regarding his ineligibility to proceed in this action in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
Accordingly:
1. Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to file objections (Doc. No. 5) is granted and his objections (Doc. No. 6) are, accordingly, deemed timely;IT IS SO ORDERED.
2. The findings and recommendations issued on February 10, 2020 (Doc. No. 4) are adopted in full; and
3. Plaintiff is ordered to pay the required $400.00 filing fee within thirty (30) days of service of this order. Any failure to do so will result in the dismissal of this case without prejudice to its refiling upon payment of the filing fee.
Dated: April 27 , 2020
/s/_________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE