Warren v. Stanislaus County Superior Court et al, No. 1:2023cv00405 - Document 10 (E.D. Cal. 2023)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 9 Findings and Recommendations in Full and Dismissing This Action for Failure to Comply With Court Order, Failure to Prosecute, and Failure to Pay Filing Fee, signed by District Judge Ana de Alba on 7/20/2023. CASE CLOSED. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALONZO WARREN, JR., 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 16 No. 1:23-cv-00405-ADA-SAB ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL AND DISMISSING THIS ACTION FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDER, FAILURE TO PROSECUTE, AND FAILURE TO PAY FILING FEE v. STANISLAUS COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, et al, (ECF No. 9) Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff Alonzo Warren, Jr. (“Plaintiff”), currently incarcerated at the Stanislaus Public 19 Safety Center in Modesto, California and proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant 20 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee and instead filed an 21 application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF No. 2.) 22 This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 23 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 24 On March 21, 2023, the Magistrate Judge denied Plaintiff’s initial IFP application 25 without prejudice, due to it not being properly completed, and ordered Plaintiff to either pay the 26 filing fee or submit an amended application within 30 days of service. (ECF No. 6.) Therein, the 27 Magistrate Judge advise Plaintiff that “[f]ailure to file a complete application to proceed in forma 28 pauperis in compliance with [the Court’s] order will result in the recommendation that this action 1 1 be dismissed.” (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff did not submit an amended IFP application nor paid the filing 2 fee. 3 On May 5, 2023, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations, 4 recommending that this action be dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fee, or file an 5 application to proceed IFP in this action, failure to abide by the Court’s order, and failure to 6 prosecute. (ECF No. 9.) The Magistrate Judge provided Plaintiff fourteen days to file objections 7 to the findings and recommendations. (Id.) The deadline to file objections to the findings and 8 recommendations has passed and no objections have been filed. 9 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 10 Court conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 11 Court finds the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 12 Accordingly, 13 1. 14 15 The findings and recommendations filed May 5, 2023, (ECF No. 9), are ADOPTED IN FULL; 2. This action is DISMISSED for Plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fee or file an 16 application to proceed in forma pauperis in this action, failure to abide by the 17 Court’s order, and failure to prosecute; and 18 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to CLOSE this case. 19 20 21 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 20, 2023 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27 28 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.