Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01558/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01558-0/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

HILTON LAWRENCE BROWN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-1558 GEB DAD P

vs.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al., ORDER AND

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order filed July 20, 2006, plaintiff’s in forma pauperis application was denied

for multiple reasons: (1) the application was not certified by a prison official and does not

include a certified trust account statement for the six-month period preceding the filing of

plaintiff’s complaint; (2) plaintiff is barred by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) from proceeding in forma

pauperis; and (3) plaintiff’s claims against defendant Schwarzenegger fail to state a claim upon

which relief can be granted and venue is improper in this district as to all other defendants. 

Plaintiff was ordered to pay the required filing fee of $350.00 within twenty days and was

advised that failure to comply with the order will result in a recommendation that this action be

dismissed. The twenty day period has expired, and plaintiff has not paid the filing fee.

On August 14, 2006, plaintiff filed three documents. Two of these documents are

captioned for filing in other courts and have no apparent relevance to this case. The third

Case 2:06-cv-01558-GEB-DAD Document 9 Filed 11/27/06 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

2

document is titled “Certificate of Probable Cause” and consists of several irrelevant documents. 

On October 2, 2006, plaintiff filed a 55-page document that purports to be a request for

transcript. The documents filed on August 14, 2006, and October 2, 2006, will be disregarded.

Plaintiff has not demonstrated that he brought this action while under imminent

injury of serious physical injury linked to the conduct of the defendants. This action should be

dismissed as barred by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s August 14, 2006 petition (docketed as #5), motion for leave to

proceed in forma pauperis (docketed as #6), and certificate of probable cause (docketed as #7)

will be disregarded;

2. Plaintiff’s October 2, 2006 request for transcript (docketed as #8) is denied;

and

IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice to the

filing of a paid action.

These findings and recommendations will be 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. A document containing objections should be titled “Objections

to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file

objections within the specified time may, under certain circumstances, waive the right to appeal

the District Court’s order. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: November 27, 2006.

DAD:13

brow1558.fpf

Case 2:06-cv-01558-GEB-DAD Document 9 Filed 11/27/06 Page 2 of 2