(PC) Martines v. Torres-Rocha

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ENRIQUE MARTINES, ) Case No.: 1:24-cv-01563 JLT BAM ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND ) RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 13 v. ) APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA ) PAUPERIS, AND DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO ALFREDO TORRES-ROCHA, et al., ) PAY THE FILING FEE WITHIN 30 DAYS ) 15 Defendants. ) (Docs. 2, 8) ) 16 ) 17 Enrique Martines is a state prisoner, and he seeks to proceed in forma pauperis in this action in which he alleges civil rights violations while housed at CSTAF Corcoran. (Docs. 1, 2.) The assigned magistrate judge reviewed Plaintiff’s Inmate Statement Report and noted “Plaintiff’s current available balance in his inmate trust account is $1,254.51.” (Doc. 8 at 1.) The magistrate judge determined that “Plaintiff is able to afford the costs of this action,” and recommended the Court deny his application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Id. at 1-2.)

23 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff and notified him that any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 8 at 2.) The Court advised Plaintiff that the “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of the ‘right to challenge the magistrate judge’s factual findings’ on appeal.” (Id., quoting Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file objections, and the time to do so has passed.

28 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case.

1 || Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations are || supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 3 1. The Findings and Recommendations dated December 23, 2024 (Doc. 8) are 4 ADOPTED in full.

5 2. Plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is DENIED.

6 3. Plaintiff SHALL pay the filing fee of $405.00 in full within 30 days to proceed with 7 this action.

8 Failure to pay the filing fee in full will result in dismissal without prejudice.

10 IS SO ORDERED.

11 |} ated: _ January 16, 2025 ( LAW pA L. wan 12 TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE