Hawes v. State of California, et al.
Filing
9
ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge William Alsup on 4/20/12. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(dt, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/20/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
No. C 12-1113 WHA (PR)
Plaintiff,
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
TERRY RAY HAWES,
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
11
12
v.
13
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
(Docket No. 6)
14
Defendants.
15
/
16
17
On March 6, 2012, plaintiff, a prisoner of the State of California, filed a letter with the
18
court that was construed as a civil rights action. Thereafter he filed a civil rights complaint. On
19
the day he filed his letter, however, the clerk notified him that he had neither paid the filing fee
20
nor filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). Along with the notice, the clerk
21
mailed to plaintiff the court’s IFP forms, instructions for completing the forms, and a stamped
22
return envelope. In the notice, plaintiff was informed that the case would be dismissed if he did
23
not either pay the fee or file a completed IFP application within thirty days. Plaintiff filed an
24
incomplete IFP form; specifically he did not submit a certificate of funds completed and signed
25
by a prison official or a prison trust account statement, despite being instructed that these
26
documents were necessary in order to complete the IFP application.
27
28
Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED without prejudice to filing a new action in
which plaintiff either pays the filing fee or files a complete IFP application. The
1
incomplete IFP application is DENIED as moot. The Clerk shall enter judgment and close
2
the file.
3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
4
Dated: April
20
, 2012.
5
WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
6
7
8
9
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
13
14
15
G:\PRO-SE\WHA\CR.12\HAWES1113.DFP.wpd
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?