From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Overton v. Ramos

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 13, 2016
No. 2:16-cv-1125 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 13, 2016)

Opinion

No. 2:16-cv-1125 CKD P

07-13-2016

MICHAEL OVERTON, Plaintiff, v. M. RAMOS, et al., Defendants.


ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

On May 27, 2016, plaintiff was ordered to file a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fee 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 complied with the court's May 27, 2016 order.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action.

Further, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.

These findings and recommendations will be 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. The document should be captioned "Objections to 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). Dated: July 13, 2016

/s/ _________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1
over1125.fifp


Summaries of

Overton v. Ramos

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 13, 2016
No. 2:16-cv-1125 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 13, 2016)
Case details for

Overton v. Ramos

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL OVERTON, Plaintiff, v. M. RAMOS, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Jul 13, 2016

Citations

No. 2:16-cv-1125 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 13, 2016)