From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ruiz v. Woodfill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 17, 2020
No. 2:20-cv-0205 KJM AC P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2020)

Opinion

No. 2:20-cv-0205 KJM AC P

04-17-2020

ROGELIO MAY RUIZ, Plaintiff, v. D. WOODFILL, et al. Defendants.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

By order filed March 11, 2020, plaintiff was ordered to pay the filing fee and was cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. ECF No. 8. The thirty-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court's order or 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)(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). DATED: April 17, 2020

/s/_________

ALLISON CLAIRE

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Ruiz v. Woodfill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 17, 2020
No. 2:20-cv-0205 KJM AC P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2020)
Case details for

Ruiz v. Woodfill

Case Details

Full title:ROGELIO MAY RUIZ, Plaintiff, v. D. WOODFILL, et al. Defendants.

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

Date published: Apr 17, 2020

Citations

No. 2:20-cv-0205 KJM AC P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2020)