Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_18-cv-00715/USCOURTS-caed-2_18-cv-00715-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

GABRIEL MENDEZ,

Petitioner,

v.

ERIC ARNOLD, Warden,

Respondent.

No. 2:18-cv-0715 DB P

ORDER AND

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has not, however, filed an in forma pauperis 

affidavit or paid the required filing fee ($5.00). See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a); 1915(a). Recently, 

petitioner was provided the opportunity to either submit the appropriate affidavit in support of a 

request to proceed in forma pauperis or submit the appropriate filing fee. (ECF No. 8.) The time 

for filing has now passed, and petitioner has not filed either the affidavit or the filing fee.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a district judge be assigned 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 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 2:18-cv-00715-KJM-DB Document 10 Filed 01/28/20 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 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).

Dated: January 27, 2020

/DLB7;

DB/Inbox/Routine/mend0715.fr.dism

Case 2:18-cv-00715-KJM-DB Document 10 Filed 01/28/20 Page 2 of 2