Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ruben J. Bontty v. Second Watch

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 15, 2011

RUBEN J. BONTTY, PLAINTIFF,
v.
SECOND WATCH, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

By order filed October 6, 2010, plaintiff was directed to file a certified copy of his prison trust account statement in support of his application to proceed in forma pauperis. On October 13, 2010, plaintiff filed a second application to proceed in forma pauperis, but again failed to have the institution of incarceration complete the certificate portion of the form, and to provide a certified copy of his prison trust account statement. This was the second opportunity provided plaintiff to either pay the filing fee or provide the appropriate documents to seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Dkt. Nos. 3, 6.) In the court's last order, plaintiff was informed that failure to comply with that order "will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice." (Dkt. No. 6 at 2.)

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case; 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, 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 reply 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. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

20110415

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.