From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cox v. Bal

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 21, 2022
2:22-cv-0804-EFB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 21, 2022)

Opinion

2:22-cv-0804-EFB (PC)

06-21-2022

ERNEST LEE COX, JR., Plaintiff, v. BAL, et al., Defendants.


ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

EDMUND F. BRENNAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 17, 2022, the court found that plaintiff had neither paid the filing fee nor submitted an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). ECF No. 3.

Accordingly, the court directed plaintiff to submit either the filing fee or the application required by § 1915(a) within thirty days. Id. The court also warned plaintiff that failure to do so would result in this action being dismissed. Id. The time for acting has now passed and plaintiff has not paid the filing fee, submitted an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, or otherwise responded to the court's order.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to randomly assign a United States District Judge to this case.

Further, it is 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)(1). Within fourteen 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 response to the objections shall be served and filed within fourteen 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 (9th Cir. 1991).


Summaries of

Cox v. Bal

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 21, 2022
2:22-cv-0804-EFB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 21, 2022)
Case details for

Cox v. Bal

Case Details

Full title:ERNEST LEE COX, JR., Plaintiff, v. BAL, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jun 21, 2022

Citations

2:22-cv-0804-EFB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 21, 2022)