(PC) Holmes v. Starr ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KEVIN HOLMES, No. 2:18-cv-0446 AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER and 14 MELBA STARR, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Kevin Holmes is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights 18 complaint. By order filed July 14, 2020, this court directed plaintiff to submit a non-prisoner 19 application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fee within thirty days. See ECF No. 7. 20 The court cautioned that “[f]ailure of plaintiff to timely comply with this order will result in a 21 recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice.” Id. at 2. The thirty-day period 22 has expired and petitioner has not responded to the court’s order. 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall randomly assign a 24 district judge to this action. 25 Further, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 26 prejudice. 27 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 28 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen (14) MAS 2. LOY VOUT SAINI ENN MUI OI VO ee AY ee 1 || days after service of these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written objections 2 | with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 3 | and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right 4 | to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 5 || DATED: August 19, 2020 ~ 6 Chtten— Lhane ALLISON CLAIRE 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28