From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brittany v. Natomas Police Dep't

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dec 14, 2018
No. 2:18-cv-2628-JAM-KJN PS (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2018)

Opinion

No. 2:18-cv-2628-JAM-KJN PS

12-14-2018

MICHALLA ALFARO BRITTANY, Plaintiff, v. NATOMAS POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al. Defendants.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

On November 7, 2018, the court denied plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, and directed plaintiff to pay the applicable filing fee within 28 days. (ECF No. 3.) Plaintiff was expressly cautioned that failure to timely pay the filing fee, or timely request an extension of time to do so, may result in dismissal of the action. (Id.)

Although the applicable deadline has now passed, plaintiff neither paid the filing fee nor requested an extension of time to do so based on any articulated cause. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:

1. The action be dismissed without prejudice.

2. The Clerk of Court be directed to close this case.

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 (14) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any reply to the objections shall be served on all parties and filed with the court within fourteen (14) days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir. 1991). Dated: December 14, 2018

/s/_________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Brittany v. Natomas Police Dep't

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dec 14, 2018
No. 2:18-cv-2628-JAM-KJN PS (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2018)
Case details for

Brittany v. Natomas Police Dep't

Case Details

Full title:MICHALLA ALFARO BRITTANY, Plaintiff, v. NATOMAS POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Dec 14, 2018

Citations

No. 2:18-cv-2628-JAM-KJN PS (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2018)