(PS) McGarry v. Johnson ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANIEL LAWRENCE McGARRY, No. 2:23-cv-00102 TLN AC PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 NICK JOHNSON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The action was accordingly referred to the 18 undersigned for pretrial matters by E.D. Cal. R. (“Local Rule”) 302(c)(21). On January 19, 2023, 19 the court denied plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) due to plaintiff’s 20 income and assets. ECF No. 3. The court ordered plaintiff to pay the filing fee no later than 21 February 3, 2023. Id. Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to pay the filing fee would result in a 22 recommendation that this case be dismissed. Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee or taken any 23 action to prosecute this case. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be 24 dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to pay the filing fee. See Fed. 25 R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110. 26 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 27 assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one 28 (21) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 1 | objections with the court. Such document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 2 | Findings and Recommendations.” Local Rule 304(d). Plaintiff advised that failure to file 3 || objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 4 | Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 5 || DATED: February 6, 2023 ~ Lhar—e_ 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