From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barillas v. Hill

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jan 31, 2023
22-cv-02957-WHO (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2023)

Opinion

22-cv-02957-WHO (PR)

01-31-2023

JOSE HUMBERTO BARILLAS, Petitioner, v. JAMES S. HILL, Respondent.


ORDER OF DISMISSAL DKT. NO. 13

WILLIAM H. ORRICK, United States District Judge.

Petitioner Barillas has not complied with my order to pay the $5.00 filing fee by the deadline. (Order Denying Application to Proceed in In Forma Pauperis, Dkt. No. 14.) Accordingly, this federal habeas action is DISMISSED (without prejudice) for failure to respond to the Court's order and for failure to prosecute, see Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

Because this dismissal is without prejudice, Barillas may move to reopen. Any such motion must have the words MOTION TO REOPEN written on the first page, and contain full payment for the $5.00 filing fee.

Respondent's motion to dismiss on grounds of non-exhaustion is DENIED without prejudice. (Dkt. No. 13.) If the action is reopened, I will reinstate respondent's motion.

The Clerk shall terminate all pending motions, enter judgment in favor of respondent, and close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Barillas v. Hill

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jan 31, 2023
22-cv-02957-WHO (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2023)
Case details for

Barillas v. Hill

Case Details

Full title:JOSE HUMBERTO BARILLAS, Petitioner, v. JAMES S. HILL, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Jan 31, 2023

Citations

22-cv-02957-WHO (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2023)