Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06197/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06197-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

REX CHAPPELL,

Plaintiff, CV F 04 6197 OWW WMW P 

vs. ORDER RE: FINDINGS & 

 RECOMMENDATIONS (#6)

F. BRASWELL, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action. The matter

was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local

Rule 72-302. 

 On February 16, 2005, findings and recommendations were entered,

recommending dismissal of this action for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be

granted. Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file objections within thirty days. On March

15, 2005, plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

The Magistrate Judge recommended that plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status be

revoked, and plaintiff be directed to submit the full filing fee. The Magistrate Judge found that

plaintiff has, on 3 or more prior occasions, suffered dismissals, or “strikes” within the meaning of

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). In his objections, plaintiff argues that Cappell v. McCargar, CV S 02

Case 1:04-cv-06197-OWW -WMW Document 9 Filed 05/06/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

2299 GEB JM P should not count as a strike, as that case is pending on appeal. The court notes,

however, that plaintiff has suffered at least three dismissals within the meaning of section

1915(g): Chappell v. Gomez, 94-CV-1520 (N.D. Cal.); Chappell v. Rios, No. S-99-CV-893;

Chappell v. Reed, CV-S-02-1706. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule

73-305, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and

proper analysis. 

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on

February 16, 2004, are adopted in full; and

2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status is

revoked.

3. Within thirty days of the date of service of this order, plaintiff shall pay the

$150 filing fee in full. Plaintiff’s failure to do so will result in dismissal of this action without

prejudice for failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 6, 2005 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06197-OWW -WMW Document 9 Filed 05/06/05 Page 2 of 2