(PC) Rackley v. Cates et al, No. 2:2010cv01065 - Document 4 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 6/18/2010 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed w/out prejudice. Referred to Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr.; Objections to F&R due w/in 14 days. (Yin, K)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Rackley v. Cates et al Doc. 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TROY RACKLEY, 11 Plaintiff, 12 vs. 13 No. CIV S-10-1065 FCD GGH P M. CATES, et al., 14 15 16 Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / By an order filed April 22, 2010, plaintiff was ordered to file an in forma pauperis 17 affidavit within thirty days and was cautioned that failure to do so would result in a 18 recommendation that this action be dismissed. The thirty day period has now expired, and 19 plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order and has not filed an in forma pauperis affidavit. 20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 21 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 22 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 23 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 24 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 25 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections 26 shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the 2 District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 3 DATED: June 18, 2010 4 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 /rack1065.fifp 7 8 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.
