(PC) Alarcon v. Webb ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEAN ALARCON, No. 2:20-cv-1201 KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 WEBB, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By an order filed June 23, 2020, plaintiff was ordered to file a completed in forma 18 pauperis affidavit or pay the required filing fee of $400.00, and was cautioned that failure to do so 19 would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The thirty-day period has now 20 expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order and has not filed the required 21 documents. 22 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is 23 directed to assign a district judge to this case; and 24 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 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 fourteen days 27 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 28 with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned wOASe COU UV VEEL □□ ERINUINGIN MUUEETOCTIL PR Ne PAY eT 1 | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 2 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 3 | Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (th Cir. 1991). 4 | Dated: July 29, 2020 Fens Arn 6 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE ’ /ew/alar1201 fpf 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28