(PC) Carter v. Solano County Sheriff's Detention Center et al, No. 2:2015cv01895 - Document 5 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/28/15 ORDERING that the Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a District Judge to this case. U.S. District Judge Troy L. Nunley randomly assigned to this case. Also, RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. 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 DANIEL MAURICE CARTER, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 2:15-cv-1895 KJN P v. SOLANO COUNTY SHERIFF’S DETENTION CENTER, et al., ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Defendants. 16 17 By an order filed September 18, 2015, plaintiff was ordered to file an in forma pauperis 18 19 affidavit and a certified trust account statement within thirty days and was cautioned that failure 20 to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The thirty day period 21 has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order and has not the required 22 forms. 23 24 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case; and 25 IT IS 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: October 28, 2015 7 8 /cart1895.fifp 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.