Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00020/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00020-3/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

Although plaintiff filed a request to proceed in forma pauperis on February 27, 2007, it 1

was not properly certified by prison officials. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MIGUEL E. DIAZ, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-0020 WBS CMK P

vs.

D.K. SISTO, et al., 

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in this action. This

proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 72-302 by the authority of 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1).

By order filed February 28, 2007, the court dismissed plaintiff’s claims with leave

to file a complaint which complied with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure’s Rule 3, which

requires that a complaint contain a statement of plaintiff’s claim. Plaintiff was also directed to,

within thirty days, file an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The thirty day period has 1

now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, an application to proceed in

forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee, or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 

Case 2:07-cv-00020-WBS-CMK Document 13 Filed 04/17/07 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

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

recommendation that this action be dismissed. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s action be

dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 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. The 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. See Martinez

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

DATED: April 17, 2007.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:07-cv-00020-WBS-CMK Document 13 Filed 04/17/07 Page 2 of 2