From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tunstall v. Alexander

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 13, 2021
2:21-cv-1701 TLN AC P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 13, 2021)

Opinion

2:21-cv-1701 TLN AC P

12-13-2021

ROBERT WILLIAM TUNSTALL, JR, Plaintiff, v. M. ALEXANDER et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

ALLISON CLAIRE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

By order filed October 26, 2021, 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. 9. 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

Tunstall v. Alexander

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 13, 2021
2:21-cv-1701 TLN AC P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 13, 2021)
Case details for

Tunstall v. Alexander

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT WILLIAM TUNSTALL, JR, Plaintiff, v. M. ALEXANDER et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Dec 13, 2021

Citations

2:21-cv-1701 TLN AC P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 13, 2021)