From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bonilla v. Heidelberger

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jun 28, 2018
No. 2:18-cv-1233 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 28, 2018)

Opinion

No. 2:18-cv-1233 CKD P

06-28-2018

STEVEN WAYNE BONILLA, Plaintiff, v. CANDICE HEIDELBERGER, Defendant.


ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

On May 21, 2018, plaintiff was ordered to file a completed in forma pauperis application or pay the filing fee for this action within thirty days and was cautioned that failure to do so would result in dismissal. The thirty-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court's order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a district court judge be assigned to this case; and

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMEDED 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)(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. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). Dated: June 28, 2018

/s/_________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1
bonil233.frs


Summaries of

Bonilla v. Heidelberger

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jun 28, 2018
No. 2:18-cv-1233 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 28, 2018)
Case details for

Bonilla v. Heidelberger

Case Details

Full title:STEVEN WAYNE BONILLA, Plaintiff, v. CANDICE HEIDELBERGER, Defendant.

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

Date published: Jun 28, 2018

Citations

No. 2:18-cv-1233 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 28, 2018)