(PC) Harper v. CDCR ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANIEL HARPER, No. 2:21-cv-00130-KJM-JDP (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 CDCR, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided 19 by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On September 28, 2021, the Court denied plaintiff’s application for leave to proceed in 21 forma pauperis because plaintiff is a three-strikers litigant within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 22 1915(g). ECF No. 10. Plaintiff was granted fourteen days in which to pay the $402 filing fee for 23 this action and warned that failure to timely submit the fee would result in dismissal of this 24 action. Id. Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee, and the allotted time has passed. 25 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 26 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de 27 novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by 28 the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 1 | ....°). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 2 || supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice for 4 || failure to pay the filing fee. 5 || DATED: November 12, 2021. 6 7 ( ti / ¢ q_/ CHIEF NT] ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28