Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02712/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02712-0/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

JONATHAN LEE RICHES, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-2712 GEB GGH P

vs.

OLIVER L. NORTH, et al., 

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff, a federal prisoner in South Carolina, has named as defendants “Iran

Contra Affair”; Oliver North, Lawrence Walsh, John Poindexter, George Schultz, “Sandinista,”

etc. Plaintiff seeks one hundred million dollars because putative defendant North is

“masterminding my kidnapping,” and he states that he is being sent to the North Pole. Plaintiff,

no stranger to completely frivolous lawsuits - - - see, among many, e.g., Riches v. Couric, 07-

2656 GEB DAD P; Riches v. Ohio State Buckeyes, 07-2662 MCE GGH P; Riches v. Dick Clark,

07-2711 FCD EFB P - - - has, as is his custom in filing his putative lawsuits, once again failed to

pay the filing fee or to provide the appropriate in forma pauperis affidavit. See 28 U.S.C.

§§ 1914(a), 1915(a). Moreover, plaintiff fails to show that this is an appropriate venue for

whatever order he seeks, see 28 U.S.C. § 1391 et seq., or that he has a claim that is, even

remotely, cognizable, 28 U.S.C. § 1330 et seq.

Case 2:07-cv-02712-GEB-GGH Document 3 Filed 04/28/08 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be summarily

dismissed with prejudice as wholly frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1).

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 and serve a copy on all parties. Such a 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: 04/28/08

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

 GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009

rich2712.fr

Case 2:07-cv-02712-GEB-GGH Document 3 Filed 04/28/08 Page 2 of 2