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)

Download PDF
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

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?