From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brown v. Felker

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 7, 2011
No. CIV S-11-1935 DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 7, 2011)

Opinion

No. CIV S-11-1935 DAD P

09-07-2011

BRIAN L. BROWN, Plaintiff, v. TOM FELKER et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

By an order filed July 27, 2011, plaintiff was ordered to file a properly completed in forma pauperis affidavit or pay the appropriate filing fees within thirty days and was cautioned that his failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court's order and has not filed an in forma pauperis affidavit or paid the appropriate filing fee. It is hereby ordered that the clerk of the court randomly assign a District Judge to this action.

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, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff 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).

DALE A. DROZD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Brown v. Felker

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 7, 2011
No. CIV S-11-1935 DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 7, 2011)
Case details for

Brown v. Felker

Case Details

Full title:BRIAN L. BROWN, Plaintiff, v. TOM FELKER et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Sep 7, 2011

Citations

No. CIV S-11-1935 DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 7, 2011)