Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01351/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01351-2/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

 On October 25, 2007, plaintiff filed a declaration with exhibits (55 pages) pertaining to 1

his claim that he has been deprived of law library access. However, plaintiff has not explained

why he needs law library access to file a signed and dated copy of the amended complaint

previously submitted to the court on August 29, 2007. Plaintiff does not need law library access

to submit a signed copy of this previous filing, nor does he need library access to complete the in

forma pauperis affidavit or pay the court’s filing fee. Moreover, as a frequent litigator in this

court, plaintiff has previously been informed of this requirement in other cases. See CIV S-04-

2375 MCE JFM Diaz v. State of California; CIV S-05-2565 FCD KJM Diaz v. DeLapp; CIV S06-2303 FCD KJM Diaz v. Carey; CIV S-07-0020 WBS CMK Diaz v. Sisto; and CIV S-07-0857

FCD JFM Diaz v. Carey. A court may take judicial notice of court records. See MGIC Indem.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MIGUEL DIAZ,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-1351 LEW JFM P

vs.

Warden D.K. SISTO, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By an order filed September 12, 2007, plaintiff was ordered to file an in forma

pauperis affidavit or pay the appropriate filing fees and file a signed and dated amended

complaint within thirty days and was cautioned that failure to do so would result in a

recommendation that this action be dismissed. The thirty day period has now expired, and

plaintiff has not filed an in forma pauperis affidavit or paid the appropriate filing fee, and has not

filed a signed and dated amended complaint. Plaintiff is entitled to amend his complaint once, 1

Case 2:07-cv-01351-LEW -JFM Document 8 Filed 10/31/07 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

Co. v. Weisman, 803 F.2d 500, 505 (9th Cir. 1986); United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119

(9th Cir. 1980). This court cannot proceed until plaintiff has either filed an in forma pauperis

affidavit or paid the required filing fee (28 U.S.C. § 1915) and plaintiff has a viable complaint on

file. Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that all pleadings be signed by the

filing party. Id.

2

as a matter of right, which plaintiff did on August 29, 2007. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is 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: October 30, 2007.

/001; diaz1351.fff

Case 2:07-cv-01351-LEW -JFM Document 8 Filed 10/31/07 Page 2 of 2