Mendez v. The United States of America et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER- Plaintiffs Complaint (filing no. 1 ) is dismissed without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to comply with this courts orders. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with thisMemorandum and Order.Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(MKR)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
IVAN L. MENDEZ,
THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA, et al.,
This matter is before the court on its own motion. On March 22, 2012, Plaintiff
filed his Complaint in this matter along with a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma
Pauperis (“IFP”). (Filing Nos. 1 and 2.) On May 31, 2012, the court granted
Plaintiff’s IFP Motion and assessed an initial partial filing fee pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(b)(1). (Filing No. 8.) In doing so, the court warned Plaintiff that his case
would be subject to dismissal if he failed to pay the initial partial filing fee by July
2, 2012. (Id.)
The July 2, 2012, deadline has passed and Plaintiff has not paid the initial
partial filing fee in this matter. (See Docket Sheet.) Therefore, Plaintiff’s case is
dismissed for failing to comply with the court’s May 31, 2012, Memorandum and
Order. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(b); see also Conley v. Holden, No. 03-3908, 2004
WL 2202452, at *1 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2004) (affirming district court’s dismissal of
inmate’s case for failing to pay the assessed initial partial filing fee).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
Plaintiff’s Complaint (filing no. 1) is dismissed without prejudice
because Plaintiff failed to comply with this court’s orders.
A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this
Memorandum and Order.
DATED this 18th day of July, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
United States District Judge
*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The
U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend,
approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on
their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties
or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or
functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or
directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
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?