Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01740/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01740-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Sacramento Main Jail
Respondent
Douglas Walls
Petitioner

Document Text:

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

DOUGLAS WALLS, 

Petitioner, No. CIV S-07-1740 LKK KJM P

vs.

SACRAMENTO MAIN JAIL,

Respondent. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By an order filed September 6, 2007 plaintiff was ordered to file an in forma

pauperis affidavit or pay the appropriate filing fees 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 or paid the appropriate filing fee.

Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order of September 6,

2007 was returned, plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the

court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-182(f), service of

documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.

 /////

//////

Case 2:07-cv-01740-LKK -KJM Document 6 Filed 10/15/07 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

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 twenty

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 reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten 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: October 12, 2007. 

2

wall1740.fifp

Case 2:07-cv-01740-LKK -KJM Document 6 Filed 10/15/07 Page 2 of 2