Belmonte v. King County

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 5 AT TACOMA 6 DAVID L. BELMONTE, Case No. 2:24-cv-01763-TSZ-TLF 7 Plaintiff, v. REPORT AND 8 RECOMMENDATION KING COUNTY, et al., 9 Noted for December 26, 2024 Defendants. 10 11 The District Court has referred this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action to United States 12 Magistrate Judge Theresa L. Fricke. Plaintiff David L. Belmonte, proceeding pro se, filed 13 a proposed complaint on October 23, 2024. Dkt. 1. Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee or 14 file an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). See Dkt. 1. 15 On October 30, 2024, the Clerk of Court sent plaintiff a letter notifying plaintiff 16 that he had failed to meet the filing fee requirement and had failed to submit a prison 17 trust account statement. Dkt. 2. The Clerk of Court instructed plaintiff to submit the 18 $405.00 filing fee or an application to proceed IFP as well as a certified copy of his 19 prison trust account statement showing transactions for the last six months. Id. The 20 Clerk of Court warned plaintiff that if he did not respond to the letter by November 29, 21 2024, the action may be subject to dismissal. Id. 22 Plaintiff has not responded to the Clerk of Court’s letter, has not paid the filing 23 fee, and has not filed an application to proceed IFP or a prison trust account statement. 24 1 As plaintiff has failed to prosecute this case, the Court recommends this case be 2 dismissed without prejudice. 3 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the parties shall 4 have fourteen (14) days from service of this report to file written objections. See also

5 Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. Failure to file objections will result in a waiver of those objections for 6 purposes of de novo review by the district judge, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), and can 7 result in a waiver of those objections for purposes of appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 8 U.S. 140, 142 (1985); Miranda v. Anchondo, 684 F.3d 844, 848 (9th Cir. 2012) (citations 9 omitted). Accommodating the time limit imposed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Clerk is 10 directed to set the matter for consideration on December 26, 2024, as noted in the 11 caption. 12 13 Dated this 10th day of December, 2024. 14 15

16 A

17 Theresa L. Fricke United States Magistrate Judge 18

19 20 21 22 23 24