Ali v. Hudson Insurance Company, et al.
ORDER DISMISSING CASE for Failure to Pay Filing Fee, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/24/17. CASE CLOSED. (Marrujo, C)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE
TO PAY FILING FEE
HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY;
AMERICAN SAFETY CASUALTY
INSURANCE COMPANY; AEGIS
SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY;
and PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY
(Doc. Nos. 2, 4 and 7)
Plaintiff Hussein Ali, proceeding pro se, filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis
(“IFP”) on November 17, 2016. (Doc. No. 2.) On December 12, 2016, Magistrate Judge Erica P.
Grosjean entered findings and recommendations, recommending plaintiff’s applications to
proceed in forma pauperis be denied and that plaintiff be required to pay the $400 filing fee in
full to proceed with this action. (Doc. No. 4.) On January 5, 2017, the court entered an order
adopting those findings and recommendations in full. (Doc. No. 6.) The order denied plaintiff’s
motion to proceed in forma pauperis, and gave plaintiff thirty days to pay the required $400 filing
fee. (Id. at 2.) That order also specifically warned plaintiff that “[f]ailure on plaintiff’s part to
comply with this order by paying the required filing fee will result in the dismissal of this action.”
(Id.) The thirty day period has expired, and plaintiff has failed to pay the required $400 filing fee.
Moreover, on March 3, 2017, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered findings and
recommendations, recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice due to
“[p]laintiff’s failure to pay the required filing fee and comply with the [c]ourt’s order of January
5, 2017.” (Doc. No. 7 at 2.) Those findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff that
same day and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen days.
(Id.) Plaintiff has not filed any objections to the findings and recommendations as of the date of
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a
de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the March
3, 2017 findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
1. The findings and recommendations, filed March 3, 2017 (Doc. No. 7), are adopted in full;
2. This action is dismissed without prejudice due to plaintiff’s failure to pay the required
filing fee and failure to comply with the court’s orders; and
3. The Clerk is directed to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
March 24, 2017
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?