(HC) Honable v. Warden, No. 2:2013cv01203 - Document 15 (E.D. Cal. 2013)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 11/19/13 recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CARLOS HONABLE, 12 Petitioner, 13 14 No. 2:13-cv-1203 JAM KJN P v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS M.D. McDONALD, 15 Respondent. 16 By an order filed June 24, 2013, petitioner was ordered to file an application to proceed in 17 18 forma pauperis or pay the filing fee within thirty days and was cautioned that failure to do so 19 would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Petitioner was granted three 20 extensions of time (ECF Nos. 9, 11, & 14); his last deadline expired on November 12, 2013. 21 Despite these extensions of time, petitioner has not responded to the court’s order and has not 22 filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis or paid the filing fee.1 Accordingly, IT IS 23 HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 24 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 25 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 26 1 27 28 On July 17, 2013, petitioner submitted a receipt reflecting payment of a $5.00 filing fee from his inmate trust account on June 21, 2013. (ECF No. 5 at 2.) However, the receipt does not reflect the case number for the payment, and petitioner has not demonstrated that the $5.00 payment was made in the instant action. The court record does not reflect that a $5.00 payment was received. 1 1 after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 2 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 3 Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the 4 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 5 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 6 Dated: November 19, 2013 7 8 /hona1203.fpfh 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 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.