Omerovic v. DHS/ICE

Filing 4

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED for Petitioners failure to comply with an order of this Court. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b); see generally James v. McDonalds Corp., 417 F.3d 672, 681 (7th Cir. 2005); Ladien v. Astrac han, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997). The dismissal is without prejudice to Petitioner pursuing his claims in the new action captioned Omerovic v. Madigan, et al., Case No. 17-cv-605-DRH (S.D. Ill. filed June 8, 2017). The Clerk is DIRECTED to CLOSE TH IS CASE and enter judgment accordingly. Petitioners obligation to pay the filing fee for this action was incurred at the time the action was filed, thus the filing fee of $5.00 remains due and payable. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 7/13/2017. (tkm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
ZUHDIJA OMEROVIC,
No. 077685306,
Petitioner,
v.

Case No. 17-cv-306-DRH

DHS/ICE,
Respondent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

HERNDON, District Judge:
This matter is before the Court for case management. On June 8, 2017,
Petitioner was ordered to either pay the $5.00 filing fee for this action brought
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, or submit a motion for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis, no later than June 28, 2017. (Doc. 3). Petitioner was warned that if he
failed to comply with the Court’s order, his case would be dismissed.
The June 28 deadline has come and gone, and Petitioner has failed to
respond to the order in this case in any way. However, he did submit a new
Petition received by the Court on June 8, 2017, this time invoking 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241 as authority for habeas relief. That Petition was docketed under Case No.
17-cv-605-DRH; Petitioner paid the $5.00 filing fee in full for the new action.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED for Petitioner’s
failure to comply with an order of this Court. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b); see generally

James v. McDonald’s Corp., 417 F.3d 672, 681 (7th Cir. 2005); Ladien v.
Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997). The dismissal is without prejudice to
Petitioner pursuing his claims in the new action captioned Omerovic v. Madigan,

et al., Case No. 17-cv-605-DRH (S.D. Ill. filed June 8, 2017).
The Clerk is DIRECTED to CLOSE THIS CASE and enter judgment
accordingly.
Petitioner’s obligation to pay the filing fee for this action was incurred at the
time the action was filed, thus the filing fee of $5.00 remains due and payable.

See Lucien v. Jockisch, 133 F.3d 464, 467 (7th Cir. 1998).
If Petitioner wishes to appeal this dismissal, he may file a notice of appeal
with this Court within thirty days of the entry of judgment.

FED. R. APP. P.

4(a)(1)(A). A motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis should set forth the
issues Petitioner plans to present on appeal. See FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(1)(C). If
Petitioner does choose to appeal, he will be liable for a portion of the $505.00
appellate filing fee (the amount to be determined based on his inmate trust fund
account records for the past six months) irrespective of the outcome of the appeal.

See FED. R. APP. P. 3(e); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); Ammons v. Gerlinger, 547 F.3d
724, 725-26 (7th Cir. 2008); Sloan v. Lesza, 181 F.3d 857, 858-59 (7th Cir.
1999); Lucien v. Jockisch, 133 F.3d 464, 467 (7th Cir. 1998). A proper and
timely motion filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) may toll the
30-day appeal deadline. FED. R. APP. P. 4(a)(4). A Rule 59(e) motion must be filed

no more than twenty-eight (28) days after the entry of the judgment, and this 28day deadline cannot be extended.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 13th day of July, 2017.

Digitally signed by
Judge David R.
Herndon
Date: 2017.07.13
13:06:11 -05'00'
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE