Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01398/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01398-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

27

28

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DARYL LEON HANSON, CASE NO. CV F 06-1398 AWI LJO

Plaintiff, ORDER TO ADOPT FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS ACTION

vs.

GEORGE W. BUSH,

Defendant.

 /

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Daryl Leon Hanson (“plaintiff”) proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis in this action and

on October 10, 2006, filed a document which this Court construes as a complaint against George W.

Bush. The complaint is generally unintelligible and states that plaintiff “was kidnaped by Mexican

Fresno police officers” and “got set up by black people.” The complaint further alleges that “Mr. George

Bush used my illegal civil rights case to get into office” and that plaintiff “witnessed George Bush’s

illegal campaign.” 

The magistrate judge issued October 16, 2006 findings and recommendations to dismiss this

action without prejudice on grounds that: (1) the complaint fails to establish this Court’s subject matter

jurisdiction; (2) the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; and (3) a further

attempt at amendment is unwarranted based on jurisdictional defects and the complaint’s fanciful,

delusional and unintelligible statements. Plaintiff filed no timely objections to the findings and

Case 1:06-cv-01398-AWI-LJO Document 6 Filed 11/03/06 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

27

28

2

recommendations. 

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court conducted a de novo review of this case. After

evaluating the record, this Court finds the magistrate judge’s October 16, 2006 findings and

recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, this Court:

1. ADOPTS in full the magistrate judge’s October 16, 2006 findings and recommendations;

2. DISMISSES this action without prejudice on grounds that: (1) the complaint fails to

establish this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction; (2) the complaint fails to state a claim

upon which relief may be granted; and (3) a further attempt at amendment is unwarranted

based on jurisdictional defects and the complaint’s fanciful, delusional and unintelligible

statements; and

3. DIRECTS this Court’s clerk to close this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 3, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01398-AWI-LJO Document 6 Filed 11/03/06 Page 2 of 2