Miller v. The Superior Court et al

Filing 8

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on 9/26/2013. (ofr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/26/2013) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/26/2013: # 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE) (ofr, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN JOSE DIVISION 11 12 BRUCE WAYNE MILLER, 13 14 15 16 Plaintiff, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT, et al., Defendants. 17 18 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. C 13-3638 PSG (PR) ORDER OF DISMISSAL On July 26, 2013, plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed in the Eastern District of California a 19 civil rights complaint, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. That same day, plaintiff also filed an 20 incomplete application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). On August 5, 2013, the Eastern 21 District of California transferred this action to the Northern District of California. The following 22 day, the Clerk notified plaintiff that he had not paid the filing fee, nor had he filed a complete 23 application to proceed IFP. Along with the deficiency notice, plaintiff was provided with an IFP 24 application and instructions for completing it. Plaintiff was further cautioned that his failure to 25 file a complete IFP application, or pay the filing fee within twenty-eight days would result in the 26 dismissal of this action. On August 26, 2013, plaintiff consented to proceeding before a 27 magistrate judge. However, to date, plaintiff has not paid his filing fee, nor has he filed a 28 complete IFP application. Case No. C 13-3638 PSG (PR) ORDER OF DISMISSAL 1 2 3 4 Accordingly, the instant action is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk shall terminate all pending motions, enter judgment, and close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: September 26, 2013 PAUL S. GREWAL United States Magistrate Judge 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case No. C 13-3638 PSG (PR) ORDER OF DISMISSAL 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?