Warden

(PC) McElroy v. Warden

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 3, 20222:21-cv-00642California340 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 LATWAHN MCELROY, No. 2:21-cv-00642 JAM DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

WARDEN, et al., Defendants. 15 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 3, 2021, plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis was denied as plaintiff had accrued three strikes 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) prior to filing this action. (ECF No. 11 at 2.) Plaintiff was ordered to pay the required filing fee within thirty days in order to proceed with this action. (Id.) More than thirty days have passed and plaintiff has not paid the filing fee, requested an extension of time to do so, or otherwise responded to the courts order. Accordingly, it will be recommended that this action be dismissed for failure to comply with court orders and failure to prosecute. //// //// //// //// //// For the reasons state above, IT IS HEREBY…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.