Jo v. Six Unknown Names Agents et al

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that Plaintiff's Complaint 1 is dismissed without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to comply with this court's orders. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Chief Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (JSF)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA YOUNG YIL JO, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) SIX UNKNOWN NAMES AGENTS, ) and BARACK OBAMA, Mr. ) President of the United States, ) ) Defendants. ) 8:13CV48 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on its own motion. On February 11, 2013, Plaintiff filed his Complaint in this matter. (Filing No. 1.) However, Plaintiff failed to pay the filing fee or file a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (See Docket Sheet.) On February 19, 2013, the court direct Plaintiff to either tender the $350.00 filing fee to the Clerk of the court or submit a request to proceed in forma pauperis. (Filing No. 4.) In doing so, the court warned Plaintiff that failure to comply by March 19, 2013, would result in the dismissal of this matter without further notice. (Id.) Plaintiff did not respond. (See Docket Sheet.) IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff’s Complaint (filing no. 1) is dismissed without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to comply with this court’s orders. 2. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. DATED this 25th day of March, 2013. BY THE COURT: s/ Laurie Smith Camp Chief United States District Judge *This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court. 2