DiTomas

(PC) Salcido v. DiTomas

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 4, 20232:21-cv-02290California390 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PAUL SALCIDO, No. 2:21-cv-2290 TLN DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER M. DiTOMAS, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner, has filed a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In an order filed January 3, 2022, this court ordered plaintiff to either file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) or submit the filing fee if he wished to proceed with this action. After plaintiff did not file a motion to proceed IFP or pay the fee, this court gave plaintiff an additional twenty days to do so. (Mar. 30, 2022 Order (ECF No. 10).) Plaintiff was warned that if he failed to file a motion to proceed IFP or submit the filing fee in a timely manner, this court would recommend this case be dismissed for plaintiff’s failure to comply with court orders. (See id. (citing E.D. Cal. R. 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41).) When plaintiff did not file a motion to proceed IFP or submit the filing fee in compliance with 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.