Barger v. CDCR

Filing 8

ORDER AND FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/8/2015 DIRECTING the Clerk to assign a district judge to this case; and RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Assigned and referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GARY BARGER,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:14-cv-2325 KJN P
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

DIRECTOR CDCR,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff Gary Barger, also known as Gary Francis Fisher, is a state prisoner proceeding

18

without counsel. By an order filed December 8, 2014, plaintiff was ordered to submit, within

19

twenty-one days, the appropriate filing fee in order to proceed with this action. (ECF No. 7,

20

citing 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).) Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to do so would result in a

21

recommendation that this action be dismissed. The twenty-one day period has now expired, and

22

plaintiff has not paid the appropriate filing fee or responded to the court’s order.

23
24

Accordingly, 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: January 8, 2015

7
8

/barg2325.fpf

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2