From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hill v. Patterson

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jan 23, 2023
2:22-cv-1328 TLN AC P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2023)

Opinion

2:22-cv-1328 TLN AC P

01-23-2023

CYMEYON HILL, Plaintiff, v. S. PATTERSON, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

By order filed September 20, 2022, plaintiff was ordered to pay the filing fee within thirty days and was cautioned that failure to do so would result in dismissal of this action. ECF No. 10. Plaintiff filed two motions for reconsideration (ECF Nos. 11, 13), both of which were denied (ECF Nos. 12, 14). The thirty-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not paid the 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)(1). 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).


Summaries of

Hill v. Patterson

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jan 23, 2023
2:22-cv-1328 TLN AC P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2023)
Case details for

Hill v. Patterson

Case Details

Full title:CYMEYON HILL, Plaintiff, v. S. PATTERSON, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jan 23, 2023

Citations

2:22-cv-1328 TLN AC P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2023)