From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martinez v. Zuniga

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 6, 2015
No. 2:14-cv-00333 MCE DAD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 6, 2015)

Opinion

No. 2:14-cv-00333 MCE DAD P

01-06-2015

MARIO G. MARTINEZ, Petitioner, v. RAFAEL ZUNIGA, Warden, Respondent.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

By an order filed November 12, 2014, petitioner was ordered to file an in forma pauperis affidavit or to pay the appropriate filing fee, within thirty days, or his application would be dismissed. The thirty day period has now expired, and petitioner has not responded to the court's order, has not filed an in forma pauperis affidavit, and has not paid the appropriate filing fee. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.

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)(l). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). Dated: January 6, 2015

/s/_________

DALE A. DROZD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DAD:10
mart0333.fpf.hab


Summaries of

Martinez v. Zuniga

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 6, 2015
No. 2:14-cv-00333 MCE DAD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 6, 2015)
Case details for

Martinez v. Zuniga

Case Details

Full title:MARIO G. MARTINEZ, Petitioner, v. RAFAEL ZUNIGA, Warden, Respondent.

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

Date published: Jan 6, 2015

Citations

No. 2:14-cv-00333 MCE DAD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 6, 2015)