Johnson v. Hopkins

Filing 4

ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/29/2017 ORDERING Clerk of Court to assign a district judge to this case and RECOMMENDING this action be dismissed without prejudice. Assigned and referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)

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
15

No. 2: 17-cv-2351 KJN P

Plaintiff,
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

v.
CEDRICK HOPKINS, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

By an order filed November 20, 2017, plaintiff was granted thirty days to file a completed

18

in forma pauperis affidavit and a certified copy of his prison trust account statement, and was

19

cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.

20

The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order and

21

has not filed the required documents.

22
23

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

24

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.

25

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

26

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days

27

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

28

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned
1

1

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the

2

objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The

3

parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to

4

appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

5

Dated: December 29, 2017

6
7
8
9
John2351.fifp

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