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.

Jeffrey E. Walker v. Phillips

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


July 27, 2011

JEFFREY E. WALKER PLAINTIFF,
v.
PHILLIPS, ET AL.
DEFENDANTS.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 11, 2011, the court granted plaintiff, for the second time, thirty days in which to complete his application to proceed in forma pauperis by submitting a certified copy of his prison trust account statement for the six month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint. In that order the court explained to plaintiff that his application to proceed in forma pauperis was still deficient because the trust account statement he submitted on April 5, 2011, was "without the usual stamp of certification provided by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation." Order at 1 (Doc. No. 10). The court also noted that plaintiff had provided proper documentation to proceed in forma pauperis in other actions in this district, and informed plaintiff that failure to comply with the order of April 11 would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.

Since the court issued the order of April 11, plaintiff has twice demanded to know the status of his case, but he has not submitted a properly certified trust account statement. As stated in the court's order of April 11, plaintiff's failure to present a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis warrants a recommendation of dismissal.*fn1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice and this case closed.

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 twenty-one 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).

hm walk0636.57


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.