Bierge v. Ramos, et al.

Filing 8

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 08/01/47 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to pay the filing fee, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court's order Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to these F&Rs due within 21 days. (Benson, A.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LEERTESE BIERGE,

12
13
14

No. 2:16-cv-03037 MCE AC (PS)

Plaintiff,
v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

ELIZABETH RAMOS, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The action was accordingly referred to the

18

undersigned for pretrial matters by E.D. Cal. R. (“Local Rule”) 302(c)(21). On June 6, 2017, the

19

court denied plaintiff’s application to proceed in form pauperis (“IFP”) and dismissed his

20

complaint. ECF No.6. The court granted plaintiff 30 days to renew the IFP application or to pay

21

the filing fee, and to submit an amended complaint. Id. Plaintiff made no filing within the time

22

provided by the court. On July 11, 2017, the court issued an order to show why the case should

23

not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, providing plaintiff 14 days to respond. ECF No. 7.

24

Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to comply could lead to a recommendation that the action be

25

dismissed.

26

Plaintiff failed to comply with the court’s order. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY

27

RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to pay the filing

28

fee, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court’s order. See Olivares v.
1

1

Marshall, 59 F.3d 109, 112 (9th Cir. 1995) (affirming dismissal for failure to pay partial filing fee

2

under IFP statute); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (lack of prosecution); Local Rule 110 (failure to comply

3

with court orders).

4

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

5

assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one

6

(21) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

7

objections with the court. Such document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

8

Findings and Recommendations.” Local Rule 304(d). Plaintiff is advised that failure to file

9

objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order.

10

Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

11

DATED: August 1, 2017

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