Robinson v. Walker et al

Filing 8

ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 04/12/10 ORDERING the clerk of the court shall randomly assign a district judge to this action. U.S. District Judge William B. Shubb randomly assigned to this action. Also, RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge William B. Shubb. Objections due within 21 days. (Plummer, M)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1 vs. J. WALKER, Warden, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in this civil rights action filed December 28, 2009. On February 17, 2010, this court directed plaintiff to submit, within twenty-eight days, an affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a), 1915(a). (Dkt. No. 6.) Plaintiff was served with the order, provided a new application to proceed in forma pauperis, and was informed that failure to comply with the order "will result in the dismissal of this action." (Dkt. No. 6, at 1.) The deadline has passed and plaintiff has neither submitted a proper in forma pauperis application nor paid the filing fee; plaintiff has not further communicated with the court. The court will therefore recommend dismissal of this action. See Local Rule 110 ("Failure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds ORDER and FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RONALD ROBINSON, Plaintiff, No. 2:09-cv-3580 KJN P

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions").1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court randomly assign a district judge to this case. Further, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 21 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). DATED: April 12, 2010

_____________________________________ KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

robi3580.f&r

Plaintiff's two-page complaint lends further support for dismissing this action. Although actual review of the merits of the complaint requires first that the court grant in forma pauperis status, a cursory review demonstrates that plaintiff has failed not only to articulate a cognizable claim (he alleges that defendants failed to provide the accommodations which plaintiff is due under the Americans with Disabilities Act, without identifying his qualifying disability or the accommodations to which he is allegedly entitled), but he has failed to allege any facts demonstrating the required "linkage" between defendants and their purported (but unidentified) failure to act. (See Dkt. No. 1, at 2.) In addition, plaintiff's prayer for relief frivolously includes "a digital TV, A Radio with Speakers, [and] Four College classes to improve his rehabilitation and sanity. . . " (Id., at 2.) 2

1