Rodriguez v. Fox

Filing 6

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge Nandor J. Vadas on 7/27/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(njvlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/27/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

EUREKA DIVISON

7
8

HENRY RODRIGUEZ,

Case No. 17-cv-2951-NJV (PR)

Petitioner,
9
v.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

10
11

ROBERT FOX,

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Respondent.
12
13
14

This pro se habeas action was filed on May 23, 2017. On that same day the court notified

15

petitioner that he had neither paid the five dollar filing fee nor submitted a completed application

16

for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). A copy of the court’s form for applications to

17

proceed IFP was provided with the notice, along with a return envelope. Petitioner was informed

18

that if he did not either pay the fee or file the application within twenty-eight days the case would

19

be dismissed. Petitioner has not paid the filing fee or filed an IFP application.

20

This case is therefore DISMISSED without prejudice. The clerk shall close this file.

21

Because reasonable jurists would not find the result here debatable, a certificate of appealability

22

(“COA”) is DENIED. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000) (standard for COA).

23
24
25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 27, 2017
________________________
NANDOR J. VADAS
United States Magistrate Judge