(PC) Foster v. Ramirez ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DEEARL FOSTER, No. 2:22-cv-1064 AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 ALDANA RAMIREZ, 15 Defendant. 16 17 On June 27, 2022, plaintiff was ordered to file a completed in forma pauperis affidavit and 18 a certified copy of his inmate trust account statement. ECF No. 5. At that time, plaintiff was 19 cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Id. 20 at 2. The thirty-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order, 21 nor has he filed the required documents. 22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to assign a 23 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 1 | with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 2 || and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 3 || time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 4 | (9th Cir. 1991). 5 || DATED: August 17, 2022 ~ 6 AMhon—Chnne ALLISON CLAIRE 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28