(PC) Garrett v. People of the State of California ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 CAMEO LOREE GARRETT, No. 2:21-cv-1628 DB P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., 14 Defendant. 15 16 Plaintiff is an inmate at Amador County Jail proceeding pro se with a civil rights action 17 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order dated September 23, 2021, the court ordered plaintiff to 18 pay the required filing fee for this action or submit a properly completed application to proceed in 19 forma pauperis. (ECF No. 4.) Plaintiff was given thirty days to pay the filing fee or submit the 20 application. (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff was warned that failure to abide by the court’s order would result 21 in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Id.) 22 Thirty days have passed. Plaintiff has not filed an application to proceed in forma 23 pauperis, paid the filing fee, requested an extension of time, or otherwise responded to the court’s 24 order. Accordingly, the court will recommend that this action be dismissed for failure to 25 prosecute and failure to comply with court orders. 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// 1 For the reasons state above, the Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to randomly assign a 2 | district judge to this action. 3 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 4 | Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 5 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 6 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within twenty-one days 7 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 8 | with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections 9 | to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 10 || objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 11 | Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 12 || Dated: February 24, 2022 14 15 .B ORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 | pp:a 19 DB/DB Prisoner Inbox/Civil Rights/R/garrl628.fr_dism 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28