(PC)Ramos v. County of Sacramento ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANTONIO RAMOS, Jr., No. 2: 20-cv-0971 KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, 15 Defendants. 16 17 By an order filed June 19, 2020, plaintiff was granted thirty days to file a properly 18 completed in forma pauperis application and a certified copy of his trust account. The thirty days 19 period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order and has not filed the 20 required documents. 21 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is 22 directed to assign a district judge to this case; and 23 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 24 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 25 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 26 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 27 with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 28 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that wOAOe 2 OW UV YE ENRON IN MUU OPO eer OY oe 1 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 2 | Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 3 | Dated: July 29, 2020 ‘ Frese Arn 5 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Ramos97 1 .fifp 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28