(PC)Jolivette v. CDCR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PAUL PATRICK JOLIVETTE, No. 2:21-cv-0407 TLN CKD P

Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CORRECTIONS AND

REHABILITATION, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. On June 15, 2021, the court screened plaintiff’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as the court is required to do under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend. In his amended pleading, plaintiff clarifies that he does not seek relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Rather, he wishes to register a “judgment from another district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1738.” Under that statute, federal courts are required to give “full faith and credit” to the decisions of state courts and the statute provides authentication requirements. Plaintiff asks that the court give full faith and credit to the decision of an alternative dispute resolution service. However, nothing suggests the decision is a decision of a court state that the court recognizes under 28 U.S.C. § 1738. Accordingly, the court will recommend that plaintiff’s “amended verified complaint for registration of a judgment from another district . . .” be dismissed.

The court notes that plaintiff has paid the $402 filing fee for a civil action. The filing fee for registration of a judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 1738 is only $49. The court will order that $353 be returned to plaintiff.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that

1. The Clerk of the Court shall refund plaintiff $353.

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Financial Department of the court.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:

1. Plaintiffs “amended verified complaint for registration of a judgment from another district...” be dismissed.

2. This case be closed.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

Dated: September 22, 2021 / □□□ / 4 ly a CAROLYNK. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE joli0407. firs