Opinion
3:22-CV-5906-DGE
01-26-2023
GREGORY MILLER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF TUMWATER, Defendant.
Noting Dated: February 10, 2023
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
David W. Christel, United States Magistrate Judge
The District Court has referred Plaintiff Gregory Miller's pending Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) and proposed complaint to United States Magistrate Judge David W. Christel pursuant to Amended General Order 02-19. On December 1, 2022, Plaintiff filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without paying the filing fee for a civil case. See Dkt. 3. On December 7, 2022, the Court screened Plaintiff's Proposed Complaint and found it was deficient because Plaintiff failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted. See Dkt. 4. The Court gave Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies by January 6, 2023 and re-noted the pending Applications to Proceed IFP. Id. The Court warned that failure to file an amended complaint or adequately respond to the issues identified in the Order would result in the Court recommending the Applications to Proceed IFP be denied and the case be closed. Id.
Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court's Order. He has not filed a response to the Order or filed an amended complaint. Further, as discussed in the Order, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted in the Proposed Complaint. See Dkt. 4. Therefore, the Court recommends the Application to Proceed IFP (Dkt. 1) be denied and this case be dismissed without prejudice.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), the parties shall have fourteen (14) days from service of this report to file written objections. See also Fed.R.Civ.P. 6. Failure to file objections will result in a waiver of those objections for purposes of de novo review by the district judge, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), and can result in a waiver of those objections for purposes of appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985); Miranda v. Anchondo, 684 F.3d 844, 848 (9th Cir. 2012) (citations omitted). Accommodating the time limit imposed by Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), the Clerk is directed to set the matter for consideration on February 10, 2023, as noted in the caption.