Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02695/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02695-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 42:1981 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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TERRANCE HERREN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-2695 GEB EFB PS

vs.

ST. PAUL TRAVELERS INSURANCE

COMPANY, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Defendants.

 /

This action, in which plaintiff is proceeding in propria persona, was referred to the

undersigned under Local Rule 72-302(c)(21), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On June 4,

2007, the court denied plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed his

complaint with leave to amend. That order explained the deficiencies in the original complaint,

and gave plaintiff 30 days to file a completed in forma pauperis application and an amended

complaint correcting the deficiencies noted in the order. The June 4, 2007, order warned

plaintiff that failure to timely file an application to proceed in forma pauperis or an amended

complaint would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 

The 30-day period has expired and plaintiff has not filed a completed in forma pauperis

application, an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the order.

////

Case 2:06-cv-02695-GEB-EFB Document 5 Filed 07/27/07 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

2

Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. See Fed. R.

Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 11-110.

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 ten days after

being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with

the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and

Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to

appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez

v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: July 26, 2007.

Case 2:06-cv-02695-GEB-EFB Document 5 Filed 07/27/07 Page 2 of 2