Ali v. Hudson Insurance Company, et al.

Filing 7

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for plaintiff's failure to pay the required filing fee and comply with the Court's order of 1/5/2017. These findings are referred to District Judge Dale A. Drozd, with objections to the Findings due within fourteen days after service of this order. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 3/2/2017. (Rooney, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15

Case No. 1:16-cv-01743-DAD-EPG

HUSSEIN ALI,
Plaintiff,
v.
HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY, et
al.,
Defendants.

FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMEDING THAT PLAINTIFF’S
CASE BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE
TO PAY THE FILING FEE

16
17

Plaintiff Hussein Ali, proceeding pro se, filed an application to proceed in forma

18

pauperis (“IFP”) on November 17, 2016. (ECF No. 2.) That application was denied on January

19

5, 2017 and Plaintiff was directed to pay the required filing fee within 30 days. (ECF No. 6.)

20
21
22
23

Plaintiff was warned that any failure to pay the filing fee would result in dismissal of the action.
Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee.
As previously explained, a plaintiff must pay the required filing fee before beginning a
civil action in federal court. Pate v. Guiltie, 2009 WL 3710714, at *1, Case No. CIV S-08-

24
1802-JAM-DAD-PS (E.D. Cal. Nov. 4, 2009), citing 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). Local Rule 110 also
25
26
27
28

provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules or with any order of
the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions . . . within the
inherent power of the Court.” The Court has “the inherent power to control” its docket and
1

1

may, in the exercise of that power, “impose sanctions including, where appropriate dismissal of

2

a case.” Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000).

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED

4

WITHOUT PREJUDICE for Plaintiff’s failure to pay the required filing fee and comply with

5

the Court’s order of January 5, 2017.

6
7
8

These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District
Judge assigned to this case pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 of the United States Code
section 636(b)(1). Within fourteen (14) days after being served with these findings and

9
recommendations, the parties may file written objections with the Court. The document should
10
11
12
13
14

be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The parties
are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal
the District Court’s order. Bastidas v. Chappell, 791 F.3d 1155, 1159 (9th Cir. 2015).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

15
16

Dated:

March 2, 2017

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2