Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01130/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01130-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALFREDO RUSSI,

Plaintiff,

v.

T. VANG, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:15-cv-1130 KJN P

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

By an order filed June 2, 2015, plaintiff was ordered to file an in forma pauperis affidavit 

and a certified trust account statement within thirty days and was cautioned that failure to do so 

would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The thirty day period has now 

expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order and has not filed a completed in 

forma pauperis affidavit on the form used by this district or a certified trust account statement. 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is 

directed to assign a district judge to this case; and

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)(l). 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 

Case 2:15-cv-01130-GEB-KJN Document 5 Filed 07/21/15 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 

objections shall be filed and served 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).

Dated: July 21, 2015

/russ1130.fifp

Case 2:15-cv-01130-GEB-KJN Document 5 Filed 07/21/15 Page 2 of 2