Warden

(HC) Velasquez-Rincon v. Warden

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 27, 20232:23-cv-00837California469 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 J.M. VELASQUEZ-RINCON, No. 2:23-cv-0837 CKD P Petitioner, v. ORDER AND WARDEN, F.C.I HERLONG, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Respondent. 16 On May 10, 2023, petitioner was ordered to file an in forma pauperis affidavit or to pay the appropriate filing fee, within thirty days, and warned that failure to comply would result in a recommendation that his petition be dismissed. The thirty-day period has now expired, and petitioner has not responded to the court’s order, has not filed an in forma pauperis affidavit, and has not paid the appropriate filing fee. Accordingly, IIT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court assign a district court judge to this case; and IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 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. §…

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.