Herina v. California Deparment of Corrections et al

Filing 9

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 3/30/2017 Petitioner has not submitted a petition and either paid the filing fee or met the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), there is simply no case before the court. Accordingly, the Clerk is hereby directed to close this case. CASE CLOSED (Washington, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRISTOPHER F. HERINA, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:16-cv-2964-EFB P Petitioner, v. ORDER CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Respondents. 16 17 18 Herina1 has filed the first page of an unsigned application for a writ of habeas corpus 19 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and a certified trust account statement. ECF Nos. 1, 7. These 20 filings, however, are not sufficient to commence a civil action. To commence such an action, a 21 party must file a complaint or a petition. Fed. R. Civ. P. 3; Rule 3, Rules Governing § 2254 22 Cases; Woodford v. Garceau, 538 U.S. 202, 203 (2003). 23 On January 17, 2017, and again on February 24, 2017, the court informed Herina that this 24 matter would be closed if he did not properly commence a civil action within 30 days, by filing a 25 signed and complete petition for writ of habeas corpus, and either paying the filing fee or filing an 26 application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). ECF Nos. 6, 27 28 1 Herina, referred to in the caption for administrative purposes as “Petitioner” is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel. 1 8.2 Those 30 days have passed and Herina has not filed the necessary documents or otherwise 2 responded to the court’s orders. 3 4 5 6 As Herina has not submitted a petition and either paid the filing fee or met the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), there is simply no case before the court. Accordingly, the Clerk is hereby directed to close this case. DATED: March 30, 2017. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Although it appears from the file that Herina’s copy of the February 24, 2017 order was returned, Herina was properly served. It is the party’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective. 2

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?