(HC) Thompson v. Spearman

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KANE MICHAEL THOMPSON, No. 2:20-cv-0726 DB P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS M.E. SPEARMAN, 15 Respondent.

17 By an order issued April 13, 2020, petitioner was directed to file an in forma pauperis affidavit or to pay the appropriate filing fee within thirty days. (ECF No. 3). At that time, he was warned that failure to comply with the order would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (See ECF No. 3 at 1). The thirty-day period has now expired, and petitioner has neither paid the filing fee nor filed an affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis.

23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court randomly assign a District Court Judge to this action.

25 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED without prejudice.

26 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within thirty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written objections wOAOe 2 EUV EEN NID MMU SON VO ee AY ee | with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings | and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the specified | time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Y1st, 951 F.2d 1153 | (9th Cir. 1991).

5 | Dated: August 21, 2020 : g ORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE | piB:13 DB/ORDERS/ORDERS.PRISONER. HABEAS/thom0726.fpf.hab