(PC) Hill v. Lynch ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CYMEYON V. HILL, No. 2:22-cv-1685 KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 JEFF LYNCH, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order filed November 1, 2022, plaintiff was ordered to show cause, within twenty-one 18 days, why his application to proceed in forma pauperis should not be denied and plaintiff be 19 ordered to pay the filing fee. He was cautioned that failure to comply with this order will result in 20 a recommendation of dismissal of this action. The twenty-one day period has now expired, and 21 plaintiff has not shown cause or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 22 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is 23 directed to assign a district judge to this case; and 24 IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 25 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 26 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 27 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 28 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 1 | with the court. The 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: December 1, 2022 Foci) Aharon 7 KENDALL J. NE few/hill1685. foc 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