(PC) Horton v. Siskiyou County Jail, No. 2:2015cv01503 - Document 5 (E.D. Cal. 2015)
Court Description: ORDER, FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/8/15 ORDERING that the Clerk of the Court shall appoint a district judge in this action. It is RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Randomly assigned and referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARCUS D. HORTON, 12 13 No. 2:15-cv-1503 DAD P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS 14 SISKIYOU COUNTY JAIL, 15 Defendant. AND RECOMMENDATIONS 16 17 By an order filed July 27, 2015, plaintiff was directed to, within thirty days of service of 18 the order, (i) file a complaint and (ii) either file an in forma pauperis affidavit or pay the 19 appropriate filing fees. Plaintiff was also cautioned that failure to comply with the order would 20 result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The thirty day period has now expired, 21 and plaintiff has neither responded to the court’s order, nor filed a complaint, nor filed an in 22 forma pauperis affidavit, nor paid the appropriate filing fees. 23 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall appoint a district judge in this action. 25 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 26 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 27 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 28 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 1 1 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 2 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 3 objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 4 parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 5 appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 6 Dated: September 8, 2015 7 8 9 DAD:10 hort1503.fifp 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.
