Doe
(PC) Anderson v. Doe
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 HECTOR CLARENCE ANDERSON, No. 1:20-cv-01620-DAD-SAB (PC) Plaintiff, v. ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING
JOHN DOE, MOTION TO ADMIT MEDICAL EVIDENCE Defendant. (Doc. Nos. 9, 10) 16 17 Plaintiff Hector Clarence Anderson is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights 18 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 19 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On December 16, 2020, the undersigned adopted the findings and recommendations 21 issued by the assigned magistrate judge (Doc. No. 5), denied plaintiff’s notice1 to proceed in 22 forma pauperis, and directed plaintiff to pay the required filing fee in order to proceed with this 23 action within thirty (30) days. (Doc. No. 8.) On December 28, 2020, plaintiff filed a motion to 24 vacate the December 16, 2020 order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60. (Doc. No. 9.) 25 ///// 26 27 1 …