Jackson v. United States et al
Filing
4
ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge S. Thomas Anderson on 9/20/2013. (Anderson, S.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
WESTERN DIVISION
______________________________________________________________________________
RONNIE JACKSON,
)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
vs.
)
No. 2:13-cv-2588-STA-dkv
)
UNITED STATES, ET AL.,
)
)
Respondents.
)
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
______________________________________________________________________________
On July 30, 2013, Petitioner Ronnie Jackson, Bureau of Prisons registration number
25343-076, an inmate at the Obion County Jail in Union City, Tennessee filed a pro se petition
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Docket Entry 1.) However, Petitioner neglected to pay the fee
required for filing of the habeas petition ($5.00) or submit a properly completed application to
proceed in forma pauperis which includes a certification by the prison trust fund account officer
and a copy of the inmate trust fund account statement for the last six months, as required by 28
U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). The Court issued an order on August 1, 2013, directing petitioner to pay the
$5.00 habeas filing fee within thirty (30) days. The order further provided that “[f]ailure to
comply in a timely manner will result in dismissal of this action without further notice, pursuant
to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b), for failure to prosecute (D.E. 2).
On September 3, 2013, Petitioner filed a letter “to inform the Court that the habeas corpus
filed on 7-30-13 case no: 13-cv-2588 was not intended for the district court and was sent to it by
error.” Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the petition without prejudice, pursuant to
Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b), for failure to prosecute.
IT IT SO ORDERED this 20th day of September, 2013.
s/ S. Thomas Anderson
S. THOMAS ANDERSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?