Cabrera v Kijakazi

Filing 9

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk's office is DIRECTED to close this case Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 1/19/2023. Case terminated. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HAM)

Download PDF
Case 2:22-cv-01908-NJK Document 9 Filed 01/19/23 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 7 8 J.O., Case No. 2:22-cv-01908-NJK Plaintiff(s), 9 10 v. 11 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, 12 13 Order Defendant(s). On November 14, 2022, the Court denied the application to proceed in forma pauperis and 14 ordered Plaintiff to pay the filing fee by December 14, 2022. Docket No. 4. Plaintiff did not 15 comply with that order. On December 27, 2022, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why 16 this case should not be dismissed. Docket No. 7. Plaintiff’s counsel filed a response indicating 17 that his client has not provided the funds for the filing fee and has stopped communicating. Docket 18 No. 8 at 1-2. Plaintiff’s counsel further indicates that, “[w]ithout the filing fee, J.O.’s cause of 19 action cannot commence and should be dismissed.” Id. at 2. 20 Initiating a federal lawsuit generally requires payment of a filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 21 1914(a). When a plaintiff has been denied in forma pauperis status and refuses to pay the filing 22 fee, their case is subject to dismissal on that ground. See, e.g., Desai v. Biden, 2021 WL 38169, at 23 *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2021), adopted, 2021 WL 276236 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 28, 2021). Plaintiff’s case 24 here is subject to dismissal given the failure to pay the filing fee despite the denial of the application 25 to proceed in forma pauperis. 26 Moreover, Plaintiff's refusal to comply with the Court’s order has interfered with the 27 Court’s ability to hear this case, delayed litigation, disrupted the Court’s timely management of its 28 docket, wasted judicial resources, and threatened the integrity of the Court’s orders and the orderly 1 Case 2:22-cv-01908-NJK Document 9 Filed 01/19/23 Page 2 of 2 1 administration of justice. There is a presumption of prejudice to the defense stemming from the 2 unreasonable delay. Anderson v. Air West, Inc., 542 F.2d 522, 524 (9th Cir. 1976). Sanctions less 3 drastic than dismissal are unavailable because Plaintiff has refused to comply with the order of this 4 Court notwithstanding the warning that case-dispositive sanctions may be imposed. 5 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s complaint is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk’s 6 office is DIRECTED to close this case. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: January 19, 2023 ______________________________ Nancy J. Koppe United States Magistrate Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?