Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01349/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01349-6/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

According to the Court Docket, an Order denying a Motion for the Appointment of Counsel was returned 1

to the Court by the U.S. Postal Service on March 31, 2006. (Doc. 17.) Similarly, although the Court granted Plaintiff

additional time to resolve the fee issue, Plaintiff made no further contact with the Court regarding the fee. Thus, on

May 22, 2006, the Court issued the Findings and Recommendations which were also returned to the Court on June 6,

2006, indicating that Plaintiff was out of custody and no forwarding address was on file. (Doc. 19.) 

1

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RODNEY WILLIAM BAILEY,

Plaintiff,

vs.

SCHWARZENEGGER,

Defendant.

 /

1:05-cv-01349-OWW-LJO-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 18)

Plaintiff, Rodney William Bailey (“plaintiff”), a state

prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred

to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302.

On May 22, 2006, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations herein which were served on the parties and 1

which contained notice to the parties that any objections to the

Case 1:05-cv-01349-OWW -LJO Document 21 Filed 06/26/06 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

Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30)

days. To date, the parties have not filed objections to the

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 73-305, this Court has conducted a

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to

be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, issued May 22, 2006,

are ADOPTED IN FULL; and,

2. The action is DISMISSED for Plaintiff’s failure to obey

the Court’s Order of December 8, 2005, to pay the filing fee or

submit an Application to proceed in forma pauperis. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 24, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01349-OWW -LJO Document 21 Filed 06/26/06 Page 2 of 2