(HC) Rodriguez v. Martel, No. 2:2009cv03205 - Document 7 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: [F&R VACATED PURSUANT TO 10 ORDER] ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/11/10 ORDERING that the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action; RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 21 days.(Dillon, M) Modified on 2/8/2010 (Yin, K).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Rodriguez v. Martel Doc. 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 FABIAN RODRIGUEZ, 11 Petitioner, vs. 12 13 No. CIV S-09-3205 DAD M. MARTEL, ORDER AND Respondent. 14 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / 15 By an order filed November 24, 2009, petitioner was ordered to file an application 16 17 to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the appropriate filing fee within thirty days and was 18 cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 19 The thirty day period has now expired, and petitioner has not responded to the court’s order and 20 has not filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis or paid the appropriate filing fee. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to 21 22 randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action; IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 23 24 prejudice. 25 ///// 26 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 2 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty- 3 one days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 4 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 5 Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the 6 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 7 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 8 DATED: January 11, 2010. 9 10 11 12 DAD:lg rodr3205.fta 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
