(PC) Uhuru v. Rao

District Court, E.D. California·Decided October 18, 2021·No. 2:20-cv-01613·Unknown

Opinion

KOHEN DIALLO E. UHURU, No. 2:20-cv-01613 WBS DB P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS YASHODARA RAO, et al., Defendants. By order filed July 7, 2021, the court revoked plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status and ordered plaintiff to pay the $402.00 filing fee within 14 days. Plaintiff filed an interlocutory appeal which was dismissed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on September 7, 2021. More than 14 days have passed since the effective date of the Ninth Circuit’s mandate and plaintiff has not paid the filing fee. In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fee. 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 fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff 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.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). Dated: October 18, 2021

nut 6L3.hfp ORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

(PC) Uhuru v. Rao, (E.D. Cal. 2021).

(PC) Uhuru v. Rao ((PC) Uhuru v. Rao) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related