IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 20, 2012
INDIGO FREEMANVIBE, ET. AL,
ARTS AND SCIENCE ACADEMY, ET. AL,
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS VALLEY
Plaintiff Indigo Freemanvibe is proceeding pro se in this civil action, having filed a complaint on October 19, 2012. (Doc. 1). On October 29, 2012, Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe issued Findings and Recommendations recommending that Plaintiff complete and submit a new application to proceed in forma pauperis, or in the alternative, pay the $350.00 filing fee for this action. (Doc. 6). The Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty days of service of the Order. (Doc. 6). On November 13, 2012, without objection, Plaintiff paid the $350.00 filing fee. (Receipt No. CAE100020627).
In accordance with the provisions of Title 28 of the United States Code section 636 (b)(1)(c), this Court has conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.
Additionally, there are concerns with Plaintiff's complaint, including whether valid causes of action have been stated. The Court may raise issues such as jurisdiction and whether a complaint states a claim sua sponte. See Chapman v. Pier 1 Imports (U.S.), Inc., 631 F.3d 939, 954 (9th Cir. 2011) (subject matter jurisdiction); Wong v. Bell, 642 F.2d 359, 361-62 (9th Cir. 1981) (failure to state a claim). Prior to issuance of any summonses, the Court will refer the complaint to the Magistrate Judge to issue a Findings and Recommendation regarding whether the complaint states valid causes of action for purposes of Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Findings and Recommendations dated October 29, 2012, are ADOPTED IN FULL;
2. The matter is referred to the Magistrate Judge for the purpose of screening the complaint to determine whether the court has subject matter jurisdiction and whether the complaint states valid and properly pled causes of action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.