Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01742/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01742-5/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DANIEL MORA,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1742 GEB CMK P

vs.

J.S WOODFORD,

Defendants.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This

proceeding was referred to the undersigned by Local Rule 72-302 by the authority of 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1). Currently pending before the court is plaintiff’s February 2, 2006 ‘Request Time

Extension to File a Certified Copy of Defendants Prison Trust Account Statement Due to

Prevention from Compling [sic] with order by Prison Officials.” (Doc. 14.) 

A review of the docket reveals that on September 7, 2005, the court ordered

plaintiff to provide, within thirty days, a certified copy of his prison trust account statement for

the six months immediately preceding the filing of his complaint. Plaintiff has previously

requested two extensions to file the trust account statement–one on September 28, 2005 and one

on November 3, 2005. In his September 28, 2005 extension request, plaintiff stated that he was

///

Case 2:05-cv-01742-GEB-CMK Document 15 Filed 02/09/06 Page 1 of 4
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

 having difficulties obtaining forms from the prison library. Plaintiff based his November 3, 2005

request on the “uncontroleable [sic] time it has taken to...receive the ...Trust Account Statement. 

Plus the possible lapse of time it might take to have the same certified.” (Doc. 9.) On December

12, 2006, plaintiff requested an order directing CSP Sacramento to file a copy of plaintiff’s prison

trust account statement directly with the court. 

In an order filed January 9, 2006, the court denied plaintiff’s request for an order

directing the prison to submit a copy of plaintiff’s trust account statement directly to the court. 

The court noted that it was not immediately apparent from plaintiff’s filings what was the

immediate cause of the problems in his obtaining and providing to the court a copy of this trust

account statement. The court stated that plaintiff would be provided with a final opportunity to

submit a certified copy of his prison trust account statement within thirty days. If plaintiff was

unable to comply with this deadline, he was ordered to file a declaration signed under the penalty

of perjury detailing exactly how prison officials have refused to provide him with a copy of the

trust account statement. Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply with the court’s January 9,

2006, 2005 order would result in a recommendation that his complaint be dismissed without

prejudice. A copy of the order was served on the Director of the California Department of

Corrections at Director 1515 S Street, Sacramento, California 95814. 

Plaintiff has now filed another request for an extension of time. He states that

“showing of court order for certified copy of defendants Prison Trust Account Statement for the

preceding six months of filing to this court started a deconsideration [sic] of presice [sic] issues.” 

Plaintiff states that he was denied access to the prison library three times in January, which

deprived him of “life, liberty [and] property, imposing a cruel and unusual punishment.” Plaintiff

has failed to detail how prison officials have prevented him from providing the court with a

certified copy of his prison trust account statement.

///

///

Case 2:05-cv-01742-GEB-CMK Document 15 Filed 02/09/06 Page 2 of 4
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

3

IT IS 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. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: February 7, 2006.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-01742-GEB-CMK Document 15 Filed 02/09/06 Page 3 of 4
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

Case 2:05-cv-01742-GEB-CMK Document 15 Filed 02/09/06 Page 4 of 4