Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01157/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01157-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Bently
Respondent
James Boyd
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

JAMES BOYD,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-06-1157 MCE KJM P

vs.

C/O BENTLY,

Respondent. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By an order filed September 20, 2006, petitioner was ordered to file a new

application to proceed in forma pauperis 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 petitioner has not responded to the court’s order and has not filed a new

application to proceed in forma pauperis. 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, petitioner may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the

Case 2:06-cv-01157-MCE -KJM Document 7 Filed 11/16/06 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

2

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 15, 2006. 

1/mp

boyd1157.fff

Case 2:06-cv-01157-MCE -KJM Document 7 Filed 11/16/06 Page 2 of 2