In Re: James A Krage

Filing 9

MINUTE (In Chambers): ORDER DISMISSING Appeal for Failure to Pay Filing Fee by Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald: The Court DISMISSES this appeal with prejudice. The Court ORDERS the Clerk to treat this Order, and its entry on the docket, as an entry of judgment. Local Rule 58-6. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (jp)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JS-6

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL
Case No. CV 16-05635-MWF
Title:
In re James A. Krage

Date: March 9, 2017

Present: The Honorable MICHAEL W. FITZGERALD, U.S. District Judge
Relief Deputy Clerk:
Cheryl Wynn

Court Reporter:
Not Reported

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff:
None Present

Attorneys Present for Defendant:
None Present

Proceedings (In Chambers): ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL FOR FAILURE TO
PAY FILING FEE
On July 28, 2016, pro se Debtor and Appellant James A. Krage filed a Notice of
Appeal in this Court. (Docket No. 1). The Notice indicated that Appellant appealed
from an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court (the Honorable Julia W. Brand),
entered July 15, 2016.
On September 1, 2016, a notice from the Bankruptcy Court, titled Appeal
Deficiency Notice, was entered, indicating that the filing fee for the Notice of Appeal
had not been paid by Appellant. (Docket No. 6). Accordingly, on February 9, 2017,
the Court issued an Order to Show Cause re: Dismissal for Failure to Pay Filing Fee
(the “OSC”). (Docket No. 8). Appellant was ordered to pay the filing fee no later than
February 23, 2017, or file a status report as to why the action should not be dismissed
for failure to comply with the Court’s order. Appellant was warned that failure to
respond to the OSC would result in dismissal of the action.
The deadline has passed, and Appellant has failed to respond to the OSC. No
request for a waiver of the fee has been filed and no basis for waiving the fee has been
provided to the Court.
The Court may dismiss an action for failure to prosecute and/or to comply with
court orders. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v. Wabash Railroad Co., 370 U.S. 626,
629–30 (1962) (noting that district court’s authority to dismiss for lack of prosecution
is necessary to prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases and avoid
______________________________________________________________________________
CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL
Case No. CV 16- 05635-MWF
Title:
In re James A. Krage

Date: March 9, 2017

congestion in district court calendars); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th
Cir. 1992) (stating that district court may dismiss action for failure to comply with any
order of the court). A Court may also dismiss an appeal from the bankruptcy court for
failure to file the required fee. Cf. In re Singh, 551 B.R. 54, 69 (2016) (denying motion
to reopen bankruptcy action where petitioner failed to file required fee).
Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this appeal with prejudice. The Court
ORDERS the Clerk to treat this Order, and its entry on the docket, as an entry of
judgment. Local Rule 58-6.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________________________________________________________________
CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL
2