Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02267/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02267-2/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 

MAXIMILLIANO MENDEZ, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

J. MACOMBER, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:14-cv-02267 AC 

ORDER & FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

 By an order filed October 27, 2014 (ECF No. 6) plaintiff was ordered to file an in forma 

pauperis affidavit within thirty days and was cautioned that 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 order and has not filed an in forma pauperis affidavit.

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk randomly assign a district court judge to this 

case. 

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 twenty-one (21) 

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 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 

Case 2:14-cv-02267-WBS-AC Document 8 Filed 12/17/14 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 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: December 16, 2014 

Case 2:14-cv-02267-WBS-AC Document 8 Filed 12/17/14 Page 2 of 2