(PC) Lucero v. Richards

Filing 8

ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 07/26/2024 ADOPTING 7 Findings and Recommendations in full; and DISMISSING this action, without prejudice. CASE CLOSED. (Lopez, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TIMOTHY PAUL LUCERO, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:24-cv-00521-DAD-AC (PC) Plaintiff, v. RAMISHA SLOCUM RICHARDS, Defendant. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING THIS ACTION (Doc. No. 7) 16 17 Plaintiff Timothy Paul Lucero is a county jail inmate proceeding pro se in this civil rights 18 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 19 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On March 4, 2024, the court ordered plaintiff to either file a motion to proceed in forma 21 pauperis or pay the required filing fee in order to proceed with this action. (Doc. No. 3.) The 22 court provided plaintiff with thirty days to comply with that order. (Id. at 1.) After that deadline 23 passed and plaintiff had failed to comply with that order, on April 17, 2024, the court sua sponte 24 provided plaintiff with an additional twenty-one days in which to comply with the court’s order. 25 (Doc. No. 6.) To date, plaintiff has not paid the required filing fee to proceed with this action nor 26 filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis, and the deadline in which to do so has passed. 27 Accordingly, on May 22, 2024, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 28 recommendations recommending that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, due to 1 1 plaintiff’s failure to comply with the court’s orders and failure to pay the filing fee. (Doc. No. 7.) 2 The findings and recommendations were served upon plaintiff and contained notice that any 3 objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 1–2.) To date, 4 plaintiff has not filed any objections and the time in which to do so has passed. 5 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a 6 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 7 pending findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 8 Accordingly: 9 1. 10 The findings and recommendations issued on May 22, 2024 (Doc. No. 7) are adopted in full; 11 2. 12 This action is dismissed, without prejudice, due to plaintiff’s failure to pay the required filing fee and failure to comply with a court order; and 13 3. 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 Dated: The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. July 26, 2024 DALE A. DROZD UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?