(PC) Bradford v. Torres ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RAYMOND ALFORD BRADFORD, No. 2:21-cv-2296 JAM KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 A. TORRES, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, sustained three strikes under 28 U.S.C. 18 § 1915(g). Bradford v. German, No 1:15-cv-1511 LJO BAM (E.D. Cal. Oct. 14, 2015). The 19 undersigned recommended that plaintiff’s motion for in forma pauperis status be denied, and 20 plaintiff be required to pay the court’s filing fee in full. (ECF No. 4.) By an order filed February 21 10, 2022, the district court adopted the recommendations and ordered plaintiff to pay, within 22 fourteen days, the appropriate filing fee. On March 16, 2022, plaintiff’s motion for 23 reconsideration was denied. 24 Fourteen days from March 16, 2022, have now passed, and plaintiff has not paid the 25 court’s filing fee. 26 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be 27 dismissed without prejudice. 28 //// ] These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 2 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days 3 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 4 || with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections 5 || to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 6 || objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 7 || Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 8 | Dated: April 6, 2022 Foci) Aharon 10 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1] fbrad2296 fpf 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28