Hopkins v. Paramo et al
Filing
2
ORDER Dismissing Civil Action Without Prejudice For Failing To Pay Filing Fee Required By 28 U.S.C. Section 1914(a) And/Or Failing To Move To Proceed In Forma Pauperis Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(a): The Court GRANTS Plaintiff forty five (45) days leave from the date this Order is filed to: (a) prepay the entire $350 civil filing fee and $50 administrative fee in full; or (b) complete and file a Motion to Proceed IFP. If Plaintiff chooses to file a Motion to Proceed IFP which the Court later grants, the $50 administrative fee will be waived. Signed by Judge William Q. Hayes on 5/7/2013. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service; per Order, a blank IFP motion form also was mailed to Plaintiff.) (mdc)
1
FILED
2
MAY - 7 2013
3
CLERK.).5. II
SOUTHERt-.015:
4
BY
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
RANDALL ALBERT HOPKINS,
CDCR #V-97737,
Civil No.
Plaintiff,
13
14
vs.
15
16
17
13cv1019 WQH (MDD)
I
ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL
ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE
FOR FAILING TO PAY
I FILING FEE REQUIRED
BY 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) AND/OR
FAILING TO'MOVE TO PROCEED
IN FORMA PAUPERIS
DANIEL PARAMO; K. SEIBEL;
R. OLSON; ANIL KAUSHAL,
PURSUANT TO
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)
Defendants.
18
19
20
Randall Albert Hopkins ("Plaintiff'), currently incarcerated at the Richard J. Donovan
21
Correctional Facility located in San Diego, California, and proceeding pro se, has filed a civil
22
action pursuant to 42 U.S.c. § 1983.
23 " I.
24
Failure to Pay Filing Fee or Request IFP Status
All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in any district court of the
25 II United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of $350
26 II filing pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). In addition, all parties filing civil actions must pay an
27 II additional administrative fee of$50. An action may proceed despite a party's failure to pay the
28 II filing fee only if the party is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") pursuant to 28
I:lEvefYOTle\~EFILE-PROSEIWQHll3cv I 019-dsm-no-pay-lFP.wpd
-1-
13cvl019 WQH (MOD)
1 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1051 (9th Cir. 2007); Rodriguez
2 v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). If a party is gmnted IFP status, the $50
3
administrative fee is waived.
4
Plaintiff has not prepaid the $350 filing fee and $50 administrative fee required to
5 commence a civil action, nor has he submitted a Motion to Proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
6
§ 1915(a). Therefore, the action cannot yet proceed. Id.
7 II.
Conclusion and Order
8
For the reasons set forth above, the Court hereby:
9
(1)
DISMISSES this action sua sponte without prejudice for failing to pay the $350
10
filing fee, along with the $50 administrative fee or file a Motion to Proceed IFP pursuant to 28
11
U.S.C. §§ 1914(a) and 1915(a); and
12
(2)
GRANTS Plaintiff forty five (45) days leave from the date this Order is filed to:
13
(a) prepay the entire $350 civil filing fee and $50 administrative fee in full; or (b) complete and
14
file a Motion to Proceed IFP which includes a certified copy of his trust account statement for
15 II the 6-month period preceding the filing ofhis Complaint. See 28 U.S.c. § 1915(a)(2); S.D. CAL.
16 II ClvLR 3 .2(b). If Plaintiff chooses to file a Motion to Proceed IFP which the Court later grants,
1711 the $50 administrative fee will be waived.
18 II
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk ofthe Court shall provide Plaintiffwith this
1911 Court's approved form "Motion and Declaration in Support of Motion to Proceed In Forma
20 II Pauperis." If Plaintiff fails to either prepay the $350 civil filing fee, along with the $50
21 II administrative fee or complete and submit the enclosed Motion to Proceed IFP within that time,
22 II this action shall remain dismissed without prejudice and without further Order of the Court.
23
2411 DATED:
f"h ~]
I
25
26
27
28
I:lEveryonel_EFlLE-PROSElWQHl13cv 1019-dsm-no-pay-IFP_
wpd
-2-
13cvl019 WQH (MDD)
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?