Opinion
2:21-cv-2290 TLN DB P
01-03-2023
PAUL SALCIDO, Plaintiff, v. M. DiTOMAS, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
DEBOFAH BARNES UNTIED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff, a state prisoner, has filed a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In an order filed January 3, 2022, this court ordered plaintiff to either file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) or submit the filing fee if he wished to proceed with this action. After plaintiff did not file a motion to proceed IFP or pay the fee, this court gave plaintiff an additional twenty days to do so. (Mar. 30, 2022 Order (ECF No. 10).) Plaintiff was warned that if he failed to file a motion to proceed IFP or submit the filing fee in a timely manner, this court would recommend this case be dismissed for plaintiff's failure to comply with court orders. (See Id. (citing E.D. Cal. R. 110; Fed.R.Civ.P. 41).)
When plaintiff did not file a motion to proceed IFP or submit the filing fee in compliance with the March 30 order, this court issued findings and recommendations in which it recommended that this action be dismissed for plaintiff's failure to do so. (Aug. 9, 2022 Findings and Recommendations (ECF No. 15).) Shortly thereafter, plaintiff filed an appeal. (ECF No. 16.) On November 21, 2022, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed plaintiff's appeal. (ECF No. 19.)
The August 9, 2022 Findings and Recommendations remain pending. Plaintiff will be given one more opportunity to file objections.
Accordingly, within twenty days of the filed date of this order, plaintiff may file objections to the August 9, 2022 Findings and Recommendations. As plaintiff was informed previously, failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of the right to appeal the district court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).