(PC)Ruiz

(PC)Ruiz v. Stane

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 14, 20221:22-cv-00236California1,346 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. FACTS AND BACKGROUND

19 Plaintiff Rogelio May Ruiz—a state prisoner—proceeds pro se on a prisoner civil rights 20 complaint filed in the Sacramento Division of this Court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on February 22, 21 2022. (Doc. No. 1). On February 25, 2022, the case was transferred to his Division. (Doc. No. 22 4). On February 28, 2022, the Court ordered Plaintiff to either pay the requisite filing fee or file 23 the enclosed motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis within 30 days. (Doc. No. 6). The 24 order warned Plaintiff that if he “fails to timely comply with this order, the undersigned will 25 recommend the Court dismiss this case for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with a court order and/or 26 27 1 This Findings and Recommendations is amended only to correct a scrivener’s error concerning the objection period and clarify the objections are due in fourteen days, not thirty days. (Doc. No. 9 at 1, 4). prosecute this action.” (Id.). As of the date on this Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff has not responded or otherwise complied with the February 28, 2022, Order and the time to do so has expired. Based on the facts and appliable law, the…

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.