Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01719/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01719-1/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NEIL R. JONES,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-1719 LEW DAD P

vs.

UNKNOWN,

Defendant. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By an order filed October 3, 2007, plaintiff was ordered to file, within thirty days,

a complaint that complies with the requirements of the Civil Rights Act, the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice. In addition, plaintiff was ordered to submit an

affidavit to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the appropriate filing fee within thirty days. 

Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to comply with the court’s order would result in a

recommendation that this action be dismissed. The thirty day period has now expired, and

plaintiff has not filed a complaint, has not filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis or

paid the appropriate filing fee, and has not otherwise responded to the court’s order. 

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without

prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110 (E.D. Cal. 1997); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

/////

Case 2:07-cv-01719-LEW-DAD Document 5 Filed 11/14/07 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

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 twenty

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.” Plaintiff is 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: November 14, 2007.

DAD:lg

jone1719.fta.fifp

Case 2:07-cv-01719-LEW-DAD Document 5 Filed 11/14/07 Page 2 of 2