Jo v. Obama

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - 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. Ordered by Chief Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
YOUNG YIL JO,
Plaintiff,
v.
BARACK OBAMA, Mr. President of
the United States,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 8:12CV442

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. On December 26, 2012, Plaintiff
filed his Complaint in this matter. (Filing No. 1.) However, Plaintiff failed to pay the filing
fee or file a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (See Docket Sheet.) On
February 20, 2013, the court directed Plaintiff to either tender the $350.00 filing fee to the
Clerk of the court or submit a request to proceed in forma pauperis. (Filing No. 5.) In
doing so, the court warned Plaintiff that failure to comply by March 20, 2013, would result
in the dismissal of this matter without further notice. (Id.) Plaintiff did not respond. (See
Docket Sheet.)
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.

Plaintiff’s Complaint (filing no. 1) is dismissed without prejudice because
Plaintiff failed to comply with this court’s orders; and

2.

A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum
and Order.

DATED this 1st day of April, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/Laurie Smith Camp
Chief 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.