(PC)Hopkins

(PC)Hopkins v. State of California

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 6, 20222:20-cv-02084California463 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MICHAEL HOPKINS, No. 2:20-cv-2084 KJM AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, who appears to be a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, 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 December 29, 2021, the magistrate judge directed plaintiff to file an amended complaint and to do so within thirty days. ECF No. 11. Thereafter, on February 9, 2022, the magistrate judge’s order was returned to the court as “undeliverable, RTS, insufficient address, unable to forward.” Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), however, service of documents at the address of record for plaintiff is fully effective. On April 25, 2022, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, which were served on plaintiff…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.