Shahzad et al v. Jerusalem Post, et al

Filing 6

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for the failure of plaintiff to comply with this court's order to pay the filing fee. FURTHER ORDERED, plaintiff's 4 motion by movants to intervene as plaintiffs is DENIED. FURTHER ORDERED, the Clerk shall ENTER JUDGMENT accordingly and close this case. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 10/08/2010. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KO)

Download PDF
Shahzad et al v. Jerusalem Post, et al Doc. 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FAISAL SHAHZAD, JONATHAN LEE RICHES, Plaintiffs, vs. JERUSALEM POST, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) / UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3:10-cv-00384-LRH-VPC ORDER This is a pro se civil rights action submitted by plaintiff Jonathan Lee Riches. By order dated August 30, 2010, the court directed plaintiff to submit the $350.00 filing fee within thirty (30) days (docket #5). The court expressly warned plaintiff that failure to respond to this court's order would result in dismissal of this action. The order was served on plaintiff at his address of record. More than the allotted time has elapsed and plaintiff has not responded to the court's order in any manner. Accordingly, this entire action will be dismissed for failure to comply with the court's order. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for the failure of plaintiff to comply with this court's order to pay the filing fee. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's "motion by movants to intervene as plaintiffs" (docket #4) is DENIED. /// /// /// /// Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall ENTER JUDGMENT accordingly and close this case. DATED this 8th day of October, 2010. LARRY R. HICKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?