(PC) Ruiz v. Hubbard

Opinion

ROGELIO MAY RUIZ, No. 2:19-cv-2351 KJM KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER A. HUBBARD, et al., Defendant. Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On January 3, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. The court notes plaintiff’s objection that he does not speak English and requires a Spanish language interpreter, but he has no right to an interpreter in this civil action. “[T]he expenditure of public funds [on behalf of an indigent litigant’ is proper only when authorized by Congress. . . .” Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211-12 (9th Cir. 1989) (quoting United States v. MacCollom, 426 U.S. 317, 321 (1976)). No act of Congress authorizes the expenditure of public funds for interpreters in civil actions. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed January 3, 2020, are adopted in full; and 2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). DATED: September 13, 2020. /ruiz2351.804