(PC) Warren v. Butte County Jail, No. 2:2008cv01680 - Document 13 (E.D. Cal. 2009)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 2/5/2009 recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice re 1 Complaint filed by Edgar Lee Warren. Objections to F&R due w/in 20 days. (Matson, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Warren v. Butte County Jail Doc. 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 EDGAR LEE WARREN, 11 12 13 14 15 16 Plaintiff, No. 2:08-cv-1680 MCE JFM (PC) vs. BUTTE COUNTY JAIL, et al. Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / By an order filed December 16, 2008, plaintiff was ordered to file a completed in 17 forma pauperis affidavit within thirty days and was cautioned that failure to do so would result in 18 a recommendation that this action be dismissed. That order was returned as undeliverable, but 19 was re-served on plaintiff on December 31, 2008. Thirty days from that date have now expired, 20 and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order and has not filed a completed in forma 21 pauperis affidavit or otherwise responded to the court’s order. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 22 RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 23 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 24 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty 25 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 26 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 2 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 3 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 4 DATED: February 5, 2009. 5 6 7 8 /001; warr1680.fff 9 10 11 12 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.
