(PC) Harrell v. Simmons

E.D. California

(PC) Harrell v. Simmons

DecidedMay 29, 2020

Docket2:19-cv-01838

StatusUnknown

This text of (PC) Harrell v. Simmons ((PC) Harrell v. Simmons) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

(PC) Harrell v. Simmons, (E.D. Cal. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSHUA NEIL HARRELL, No. 2:19-cv-1838 TLN AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 ANTUAN SIMMONS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order filed April 27, 2020, plaintiff was given an additional fourteen days to pay the 18 filing fee and was cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this 19 action be dismissed. ECF No. 19. The fourteen-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not 20 paid the fee. 21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 22 prejudice. 23 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 24 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 25 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 26 with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 27 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 28 //// WAS Ct UV VEOVOU PEEING PVEUPTOCHIL oh FIR Ueto Faye eve’

1 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 2 | Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 3 || DATED: May 28, 2020 ~ 4 Attlien— Lhane ALLISON CLAIRE 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSHUA NEIL HARRELL, No. 2:19-cv-1838 TLN AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 ANTUAN SIMMONS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order filed April 27, 2020, plaintiff was given an additional fourteen days to pay the 18 filing fee and was cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this 19 action be dismissed. ECF No. 19. The fourteen-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not 20 paid the fee. 21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 22 prejudice. 23 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 24 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 25 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 26 with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 27 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 28 //// WAS Ct UV VEOVOU PEEING PVEUPTOCHIL oh FIR Ueto Faye eve’

1 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 2 | Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 3 || DATED: May 28, 2020 ~ 4 Attlien— Lhane ALLISON CLAIRE 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

(PC) Harrell v. Simmons, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pc-harrell-v-simmons-caed-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack