(PC) Ray v. Hasem

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY D. RAY, No. 2:21-cv-0072 AC P

Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

O. HASEM, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff, a former state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On September 3, 2021, plaintiff was ordered to file a completed non-prisoner in forma pauperis application and to do so within thirty days. ECF No. 12. The thirty-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order and has not filed the required document.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to assign a district judge to this matter, and

IT IS HEREBY 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)(l). Within twenty-one days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (th Cir. 1991).

DATED: October 22, 2021 A /, ALLISON CLAIRE g UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1]