Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00373/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00373-24/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Allen Hammler is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On December 13, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation 

recommending that Defendants’ motion to declare Plaintiff a vexatious litigant and post security be 

denied. (ECF No. 63.) The Findings and Recommendation was served on Plaintiff and contained 

notice that objections were due within twenty-one days. (Id.) No objections were filed and time to do 

so has now expired.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the 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 by proper analysis.

ALLEN HAMMLER,

 Plaintiff,

v.

CLARK, et.al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:19-cv-00373-AWI-SAB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION, AND DENYING 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DECLARE 

PLAINTIFF A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT AND 

POST SECURITY

[ECF Nos. 56, 61, 63]

Case 1:19-cv-00373-AWI-SAB Document 70 Filed 02/20/20 Page 1 of 2
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

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations filed on December 13, 2019, are adopted in full; 

and

2. Defendants’ motion to declare Plaintiff a vexatious litigant and post security (ECF No. 

56) is DENIED; and

3. Plaintiff’s motion to file a surreply (ECF No. 61) is denied as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 20, 2020 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-00373-AWI-SAB Document 70 Filed 02/20/20 Page 2 of 2