(PC) Cross v. Newsom ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 QUINTIN R. CROSS, No. 2:19-cv-02462-CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND 14 GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Defendants. 16 17 By an order filed April 13, 2020, plaintiff was ordered to pay the filing fee within fourteen 18 days and was cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be 19 dismissed without prejudice. The allotted time period has now expired, and plaintiff has not paid 20 the filing fee or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court randomly assign this 22 matter to a district court judge. 23 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 24 Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 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 fourteen days 27 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 28 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned wOAIG 2 □□□ VV ROSY NEE MUU PIA eA ee 1 | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 2 | objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 3 | parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 4 | appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 5 | Dated: May 5, 2020 i; dp. | bie 6 CAROLYN K. DELANEY : 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 12/cros2462.fifp.docx 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28