(PC)Lopez v. Garcia ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 EUTIMIO LOPEZ, No. 2:20-cv-0251 TLN AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 U. GARCIA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order filed February 6, 2020, plaintiff was directed to pay the filing fee to proceed with 18 this action, or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis affidavit together with a 19 certified copy of his prison trust account statement. ECF No. 3. Plaintiff was cautioned that 20 failure to comply within thirty days would result in a recommendation that this action be 21 dismissed. Id. at 1. The thirty-day period has expired and plaintiff has not responded to the 22 court’s order. 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 24 prejudice. 25 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 26 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one (21) 27 days after the filing date of these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 28 objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate wOASe 2 OU UVM EYE PRINCE MUU PO Ne er Oye ove 1 | Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time 2 || may waive the right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 3 | 1991). 4 | DATED: April 16, 2020 ~ 5 Htttenr— Lhar—e_ ALLISON CLAIRE 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28