(PC) Van Huisen v. Desantis

Opinion

----oo0oo---- GREGORY S. VAN HUISEN, No. 2:23-cv-1758 WBS CSK Plaintiff, Ninth Circuit No. 24-2616 v. ORDER RON DESANTIS, et al., Defendants. ----oo0oo---- After the court adopted the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations and dismissed the case, plaintiff appealed. (See Docket Nos. 25, 29, 38.) The Ninth Circuit has now referred the matter back to this court “for the limited purpose of determining whether in forma pauperis status should continue for this appeal or whether the appeal is frivolous or taken in bad faith” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) and Hooker v. American Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002). (Docket No. 55.) For the reasons discussed in the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations, and as found in the court’s order —_——— eI IERIE RIE IRIE ES EIEIO

adopting those Findings and Recommendations, the court finds that the complaint and plaintiff’s appeal are frivolous. As the Magistrate Judge found, “plaintiff’s second amended complaint is incomprehensible, lacks substance and fails to identify how any named defendant violated plaintiff’s federal statutory or constitutional rights.” (Docket No. 25 at 4.) Accordingly, plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status is hereby REVOKED. See Hooker, 302 F.3d at 1092. The Clerk of Court shall promptly notify the Ninth Circuit and the parties of this determination and order. Dated: May 6, 2024 oitiomn th. Ld. be—~ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE