(PC) Jacques v. Hearn

Filing 10

ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Sean C. Riordan on 11/22/24, ORDERING that the Clerk assign a district judge to this case. This case has been randomly assigned to District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta. Henceforth, the case number is 2:23-02714-DJC-SCR (PC). It is RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for plaintiff's failure to pay the filing fee and the Clerk be directed to close this case. Matter REFERRED to District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta. Within 21 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. (Salmeron, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MICHAEL E. JACQUES,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.

ORDER AND

C. HEARN,

15

No. 2:23-cv-02714 SCR P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Defendant.

16
17
18

Plaintiff, proceeding without counsel while confined at Salinas Valley State Prison, filed

19

this civil rights action concerning events that took place at Mule Creek State Prison. (ECF No. 1.)

20

Plaintiff also filed an in forma pauperis affidavit (“IFP”) in which he stated he was unable to pay

21

the court costs and had not received money from other sources over the last twelve months. (ECF

22

No. 2 at 1.)

23

On June 13, 2024, the magistrate judge previously assigned to this case denied without

24

prejudice plaintiff’s application to proceed IFP, finding plaintiff had received funds, was able to

25

pay the court costs, and was not entitled to IFP status on the day he signed the IFP affidavit, and

26

constructively filed the complaint because his account contained $2,297.63. (ECF No. 6 at 2.)

27

Plaintiff was ordered to either submit the appropriate court costs to the Clerk of the Court, or

28

“clarify his financial condition and attempt to demonstrate financial hardship in a renewed IFP
1

1

application” along with an explanation why the incoming funds were not disclosed on the IFP

2

affidavit. (Id. at 3.)

3

Plaintiff responded to the order dated June 13, 2024. (ECF No. 7.) Reviewing plaintiff’s

4

response, the undersigned determined plaintiff adequately explained why funds were not

5

disclosed but did not make an adequate showing of indigency. (ECF No. 9.) By order served on

6

October 16, 2024, plaintiff was ordered to pay the filing fee and administrative fee within 30 days

7

to proceed with this case. (Id. at 3.) The time granted for this purpose has expired and plaintiff has

8

not paid the court costs or requested more time to do so.

9
10

In accordance with the above, IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall assign a
district judge to this case.

11

In addition, IT IS RECOMMENDED as follows:

12

1. This action be dismissed for plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fee.

13

2. The Clerk of the Court be directed to close this case.

14

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

15

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

16

after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections

17

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

18

to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the

19

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d

20

1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

21
22

Dated: November 22, 2024

23
24
25
26
27
28
2