(PC) Johnson v. Hopkins, No. 2:2017cv02351 - Document 9 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 3/22/2018 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Yin, K)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Johnson v. Hopkins Doc. 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 R. WAYNE JOHNSON, 12 13 14 Plaintiff, v. No. 2:17-cv-2351 TLN KJN P FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CEDRICK HOPKINS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 Plaintiff is a prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is incarcerated in Amarillo, Texas. On January 2, 2018, plaintiff filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 20 5.) The section of plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis requiring certification by 21 prison officials is not complete. Plaintiff also failed to file his six month trust account statement. 22 On the form, plaintiff wrote, “refused…” Plaintiff also wrote, “now refusing to issue 6 month 23 trust funds.” 24 On February 7, 2018, the undersigned ordered plaintiff to file additional information 25 regarding his claims that prison officials refused to assist him in preparing his application to 26 proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 6.) The undersigned ordered plaintiff to inform the court of 27 the names of the prison officials who refused to sign his application and who refused to provide 28 him with his 6 month trust account statement. (Id.) Plaintiff was also ordered to inform the court 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 when he sought this information and how he requested this information. (Id.) The undersigned 2 ordered plaintiff to submit this briefing within thirty days. (Id.) 3 Thirty days passed and plaintiff did not file the further briefing ordered by the 4 undersigned on February 7, 2018. Instead, plaintiff filed a first amended complaint. (ECF No. 5 8.) The first amended complaint does not address the issues discussed in the February 7, 2018 6 order. Accordingly, the undersigned recommends that this action be dismissed for plaintiff’s 7 failure to comply with the February 7, 2018 order. 8 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 9 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 10 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 11 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 12 with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 13 and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 14 time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 15 (9th Cir. 1991). 16 Dated: March 22, 2018 17 18 19 20 John2351.fr 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.
