Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00410/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00410-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Mika Christina Alfaro
Plaintiff
Wells
Defendant

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

MIKA CHRISTINA ALFARO,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-08-0410 GEB EFB PS

vs.

MRS. WELLS,

Defendant. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding in propria persona, was referred to the

undersigned under Local Rule 72-302(c)(21), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff filed

her complaint on February 22, 2008, but failed to pay the fee required to file an action in this

court or submit an application to proceed without prepayment of fees. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a),

1915(a). 

On February 27, 2008, the court granted plaintiff thirty days to file either the appropriate

filing fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Pursuant to that order, the clerk served

plaintiff with new forms for proceeding in forma pauperis. That order warned plaintiff that

failure to comply with the order would result in a recommendation that the this action be

dismissed without prejudice. 

////

Case 2:08-cv-00410-GEB-EFB Document 4 Filed 04/18/08 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

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. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without

prejudice, and the Clerk be directed to close the case.

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 ten 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.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right

to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998);

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

DATED: April 18, 2008.

Case 2:08-cv-00410-GEB-EFB Document 4 Filed 04/18/08 Page 2 of 2