Arreola v. Crabtree

Filing 7

ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE, ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 4/29/13. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/29/2013)

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
5

8

v.
OFFICER CRABTREE,
Respondent.

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

14
15
16
17
18
19

Corpus." He also filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP).
In an Order dated February 19, 2013, after conducting a preliminary review of the petition,
the Court found that the petition did not challenge either the fact of Petitioner's conviction or the
length of his sentence. Instead, the Court found that the petition related to the conditions of his
confinement. The Court dismissed the petition with leave to amend and granted Petitioner
twenty-eight days to "file a civil rights complaint on the attached civil rights complaint form, stating
his claims for relief, if he wishes to go forward with this action as a civil rights action." (Feb. 19,
2013 Order at 2.) The Court further informed Petitioner that the failure to file a completed civil
rights complaint would result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

/

Petitioner, a state prisoner, filed a document captioned "Petition For A Writ of Habeas

12
13

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT
PREJUDICE

Petitioner,

6
7

No. C 12-06512 YGR (PR)

MANUEL ARREOLA,

In its February 19, 2013 Order, the Court reviewed Petitioner's pending IFP application and
determined that because Petitioner had originally filed this case as a habeas corpus action, his IFP
application should be denied without prejudice to filing a new application or paying the full $350.00
filing fee for a civil rights action. The Court further instructed Petitioner to "pay the $350.00 filing
fee, or file an application for leave to proceed IFP, before this action may proceed." (Id. at 3.) The
Court also informed Petitioner that the failure "to pay the filing fee or file the requisite documents
within the twenty-eight-day deadline shall result in dismissal of this action without prejudice." (Id.
at 4.)

1

On March 22, 2013, Petitioner filed a motion for a twenty-eight-day extension of time up to

2

and including April 19, 2013 to "properly file and amend his complaint." (Pet'r Mar. 22, 2013 Mot.

3

for EOT at 1.) Petitioner did not request an extension of time to pay the $350.00 filing fee or file a

4

new application for leave to proceed IFP.

5
6
7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

In an Order dated April 8, 2013, the Court granted Plaintiff's request for an extension of time
to file his complaint up to and including April 19, 2013.
The deadlines have passed, and Petitioner has neither filed a complaint by April 19, 2013 nor
paid the filing fee/completed a new IFP application within the original twenty-eight-day deadline.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment, terminate all pending motions, and close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: April 29, 2013
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
G:\PRO-SE\YGR\HC.12\Arreola6512.Dism-noAC&noNewIFP.wpd

2