Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01437/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01437-1/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

WALTER LANGSTON,

Plaintiff,

v.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:15-cv-1437 GEB KJN P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

By an order filed July 17, 2015, plaintiff was ordered to file a completed in-forma 

pauperis affidavit and a certified copy of his prison trust account statement within thirty days and 

was cautioned that the 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 

order1and has not filed an in forma pauperis affidavit and trust account statement. Accordingly, 

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 

 

1

 On August 5, 2015, plaintiff filed a request for copies of complaints filed in this and two other 

actions filed by plaintiff in the Eastern District, but plaintiff did not address the July 17, 2015 

order. (ECF No. 7.)

Case 2:15-cv-01437-GEB-KJN Document 8 Filed 09/01/15 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

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 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: August 31, 2015

/lang1437.fifp

Case 2:15-cv-01437-GEB-KJN Document 8 Filed 09/01/15 Page 2 of 2