(PC) Vasquez v. Taylor. et al.,, No. 2:2010cv01529 - Document 5 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 8/10/10 ORDERING that Clrk is directed to randomly assign a district judge to this action; RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 21 days.(Dillon, M)
Download PDF
(PC) Vasquez v. Taylor. et al., Doc. 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSE FEDERICO VASQUEZ, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 No. CIV S-10-1529 DAD P vs. M. TAYLOR, et al., 14 ORDER AND Defendants. 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / 16 By an order filed June 29, 2010, plaintiff was ordered to file an in forma pauperis 17 affidavit or to pay the appropriate filing fees within thirty days. In addition, plaintiff’s complaint 18 was dismissed and he was granted leave to file an amended complaint within thirty days. 19 Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to comply with the court’s order would result in a 20 recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice. The thirty day period has now 21 expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order. 22 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign this action to a District Judge. 24 Also, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 25 prejudice. 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, plaintiff may file written 4 objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 5 Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections 6 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. 7 Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 8 DATED: August 10, 2010. 9 10 11 12 DAD:4 vasq1529.fifp.fta 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2