United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2021

(PC)Garrett v. Amador County Sheriff Department

(PC)Garrett v. Amador County Sheriff Department
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided November 16, 2021
(PC)Garrett v. Amador County Sheriff Department

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CAMEO L. GARRETT, No. 2:21-cv-1624-EFB P

Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

AMADOR COUNTY SHERIFF

DEPARTMENT, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a county jail inmate proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 18

U.S.C. § 1983. On September 28, 2021, the court found that plaintiff had submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis but had failed to submit a certified copy of his trust account statement as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). ECF No. 5.

Accordingly, the court directed plaintiff to submit a certified trust account statement to complete his request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Id. The court also warned plaintiff that failure to do so would result in this action being dismissed. Id. The time for acting has now passed and plaintiff has not paid the filing fee, submitted another application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, or otherwise responded to the court’s order.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to randomly assign a United States District Judge to this case. ] Further, it is 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, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Yst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

Dated: November 16, 2021. tier, BLM ti

EDMUND F. BRENNAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.