(HC) Cook v. Unknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RONALD D. COOK, No. 2:20-cv-2108 AC P

Petitioner,

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND v. RECOMMENDATIONS

UNKNOWN,

Respondent.

By order filed October 27, 2020, petitioner was ordered to file a petition and to either pay the filing fee or file an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis within thirty days and cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. ECF No. 3. After petitioner failed to take any action, he was given an additional twenty-one days to comply with the order and reminded that failure to comply would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. ECF No. 4. The twenty-one-day period has now expired, and petitioner has not responded to the court’s order and has not filed the required documents or paid the filing fee.

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

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

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)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written objections with the court. Such a 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. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: January 26, 2021 ~ Hthren— Lhar—e_

ALLISON CLAIRE

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE