(PC) Ruiz v. Woodfill ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROGELIO MAY RUIZ, No. 2:20-cv-0205 KJM AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS 14 D. WOODFILL, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 3, 2020, the undersigned recommended that plaintiff be denied leave 19 to proceed in forma pauperis and be required to pay the filing fee in full or have the complaint 20 dismissed. ECF No. 4 (Findings and Recommendations). Plaintiff did not initially file any 21 objections, and the Findings and Recommendations were adopted in full. ECF No. 8. Plaintiff 22 then filed a motion for appointment of counsel that also sought reconsideration of the order 23 directing him to pay the filing fee. ECF No. 9. 24 On April 20, after plaintiff failed to pay the filing fee, the undersigned recommended that 25 the case be dismissed. ECF No. 11 (Findings and Recommendations). The District Judge then 26 provided plaintiff with an additional opportunity to file objections to the February 3, 2020 27 Findings and Recommendations (ECF No. 12), and plaintiff proceeded to filed objections (ECF 28 No. 15). The District Judge affirmed the previous adoption of the February 3, 2020 Findings and 1 || Recommendations and denied plaintiffs request to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 17. On 2 || July 13, 2020, the undersigned vacated the April 20, 2020 Findings and Recommendations (ECF 3 || No. 11), and provided plaintiff with an additional thirty days to pay the requisite filing fee. ECF 4 | No. 18. The order stated that plaintiffs failure to comply with this order and pay the fee would 5 || result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed. Id. 6 Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee. Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that 7 | this action be dismissed without prejudice. 8 It is further recommended that plaintiffs motions for appointment of counsel, interpreter, 9 || requests to proceed in forma pauperis, and to remove the assigned magistrate judge (ECF Nos. 10 || 22, 24), be DENIED as moot. 11 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 12 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within fourteen days 13 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 14 | with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 15 || “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 16 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 17 | Court’s order. Martinez v. Y1st, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 18 || DATED: November 2, 2020 . ~ 19 Bettie Clare 20) ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28