Boult v. Soto

Full title: DAVID C. BOULT, Petitioner, v. SOTO, Respondent.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Nov 5, 2013

2:13-cv-02227 DAD P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 5, 2013)

Opinion

DAVID C. BOULT, Petitioner, v. SOTO, Respondent. No. 2:13-cv-02227 DAD P United States District Court, E.D. California. November 5, 2013

          ORDER

          DALE A. DROZD, Magistrate Judge.

         Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has not, however, filed an in forma pauperis affidavit or paid the required filing fee ($5.00). See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a); 1915(a). Petitioner will be provided the opportunity to either submit the appropriate affidavit in support of a request to proceed in forma pauperis or submit the appropriate filing fee.

         In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

         1. Petitioner shall submit, within thirty days from the date of this order, an affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee; petitioner's failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed; and

         2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner a copy of the in forma pauperis form used by this district.