Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00232/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00232-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 320
Nature of Suit: Assault, Libel, and Slander
Cause of Action: 28:1346 Tort Claim

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN HUTCHENS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-10-232 FCD KJM PS

vs.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ORDER AND

Defendant. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

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.

1

Case 2:10-cv-00232-FCD-KJM Document 5 Filed 02/12/10 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

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).

DATED: February 12, 2010. 

006

hutchens.57

2

Case 2:10-cv-00232-FCD-KJM Document 5 Filed 02/12/10 Page 2 of 2