Jensen v. State of Washington et al
Filing
16
ORDER DENYING IFP APPLICATION by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. The Court ORDERS as follows: (1) The Magistrate Judges report and recommendation is approved and adopted. (2) Plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 7) is DENIED. (3) Plai ntiff shall pay the required filing fee [$400.00] to the Clerk of the Court within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. (4) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to Plaintif Filing fee due by 2/13/2017, **2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(William Jensen, Prisoner ID: 877996)(SG)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
WILLIAM FREDERICK JENSEN,
Plaintiff,
Case No. C16-1963-RSM-BAT
ORDER DENYING IFP APPLICATION
v.
STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al.,
14
15
Defendants.
16
The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. #7),
17
the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable Brian A. Tsuchida, United States Magistrate
18
Judge, Plaintiff’s Objections, and the remaining record. Plaintiff concedes in his Objections
19
20
21
that he must pay the $400 filing fee and objects solely to dicta in the Report and
Recommendation. See Dkt. #12. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows:
22
(1) The Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation is approved and adopted.
23
(2) Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 7) is DENIED.
24
(3) Plaintiff shall pay the required filing fee [$400.00] to the Clerk of the Court within
25
26
27
thirty (30) days of the date of this Order.
(4) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to Plaintiff.
28
ORDER DENYING IFP APPLICATION - 1
1
DATED this 13th day of January 2017.
2
3
4
5
A
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER DENYING IFP APPLICATION - 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?