Rodriguez

(PC) Tatum v. Rodriguez

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 29, 20241:24-cv-00334California402 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 DA TAEVONNE Q. TATUM, 1:24-cv-00334-EPG (PC)

11 Plaintiff,

ORDER TO ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE

12 v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS,

13 RODRIGUEZ, et al., RECOMMENDING THAT THIS ACTION BE

DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE

14 Defendants. 15 OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN

THIRTY DAYS

16

17 Plaintiff Da Taevonne Q. Tatum is a prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights lawsuit 18 filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. After Plaintiff failed to submit an application to proceed in 19 forma pauperis or pay the filing fee, the Court issued an order on March 22, 2024, giving Plaintiff 20 thirty days to do either and warning of dismissal if Plaintiff failed to comply. (ECF No. 6). The 21 thirty-day period has expired, and Plaintiff has failed to pay the filing fee, submit an IFP 22 application, or otherwise respond to the Court’s order. 23 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall assign a district judge to this 24 case. 25 And IT IS…

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.