Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-02773/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-02773-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Corie J. Caraway
Defendant
Orrin Tyler Colbourn
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ORRIN TYLER COLBOURN, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CORIE J. CARAWAY, 

Defendant. 

No. 2:24-cv-2773 SCR P 

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. §1983. Plaintiff has not, however, filed an in forma pauperis affidavit or paid the required 

filing fee of $350.00 plus the $55.00 administrative fee.1

 See 28 U.S.C. §§1914(a), 1915(a). 

Plaintiff would ordinarily be provided the opportunity either to submit the appropriate affidavit in 

support of a request to proceed in forma pauperis or to submit the required fees totaling $405.00. 

However, the only defendant in this case is a judge who plaintiff sues for damages for an 

allegedly unconstitutional sentence imposed earlier this year. In a Section 1983 case for 

damages, judges are entitled to absolute immunity for actions taken within their jurisdiction. See 

Schucker v. Rockwood, 846 F.2d 1202, 1204 (9th Cir. 1988) (per curiam). If Plaintiff wishes to 

1

 If leave to file in forma pauperis is granted, plaintiff will still be required to pay the filing fee 

but will be allowed to pay it in installments. Litigants proceeding in forma pauperis are not 

required to pay the $55.00 administrative fee. 

Case 2:24-cv-02773-TLN-SCR Document 3 Filed 10/28/24 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 

challenge his sentence in federal court through a habeas corpus action, he must first exhaust all 

state court remedies. Plaintiff does not state a Section 1983 claim on which relief can be granted 

and any amendment would be futile. Plaintiff will accordingly not be ordered to submit an IFP 

application or pay the required filing fee. 

 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court 

assign a district court judge to this action. 

 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for failure to state a 

claim. 

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-one 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 result in waiver of the right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 

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

DATED: October 25, 2024 

Case 2:24-cv-02773-TLN-SCR Document 3 Filed 10/28/24 Page 2 of 2