(PC) Quintana v. Escobar

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California

(PC) Quintana v. Escobar

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOHNNY QUINTANA Case No. 1:24-cv-0258 JLT EPG (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, 13 v. DISMISSING THE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO PAY THE 14 D. ESCOBAR, et al., FILING FEE, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE THE CASE 15 Defendants. (Doc. 8) 16 17 Johnny Quintana initiated this action, seeking to hold the defendants liable for violations 18 of his civil rights during his incarceration at Avenal State Prison. (Doc. 1.) Plaintiff failed to pay 19 the filing fee or apply to proceed in forma pauperis when he filed the complaint. The Court 20 ordered him to take either action within 30 days. (Doc. 4.) The Court warned Plaintiff that 21 “[f]ailure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of this action.” (Id. at 1, emphasis 22 omitted.) 23 Plaintiff failed to take any action. Thus, the magistrate judge recommended the action be 24 dismissed without prejudice. (Doc. 8.) The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on 25 Plaintiff and notified him that any objections—or a completed in forma pauperis application— 26 were due within 30 days. (Id. at 2.) The Court advised Plaintiff that the “failure to file objections 27 within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (Id., citing Wilkerson v. 28 Wheeler,

772 F.3d 834, 838-39

(9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file objections, and the time to 1 | do so has passed. 2 Pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. 3 | Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations 4 | are supported by the record and proper analysis. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS: 5 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on April 29, 2024 (Doc. 8) are 6 ADOPTED in full. 7 2. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice due to Plaintiffs failure to pay the 8 filing fee. 9 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. D Dated: _ June 4, 2024 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown