Mendez v. Arnold

Filing 10

ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 1/27/20 ORDERING that a District Judge be assigned to this case. Also, RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Assigned and referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GABRIEL MENDEZ,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:18-cv-0715 DB P

Petitioner,
v.

ORDER AND

ERIC ARNOLD, Warden,

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Respondent.

16
17

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas

18

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has not, however, filed an in forma pauperis

19

affidavit or paid the required filing fee ($5.00). See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a); 1915(a). Recently,

20

petitioner was provided the opportunity to either submit the appropriate affidavit in support of a

21

request to proceed in forma pauperis or submit the appropriate filing fee. (ECF No. 8.) The time

22

for filing has now passed, and petitioner has not filed either the affidavit or the filing fee.

23

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a district judge be assigned 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 served and filed 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: January 27, 2020

6
7
8
9

/DLB7;
DB/Inbox/Routine/mend0715.fr.dism

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