Opinion
21-CV-283 JLS (MDD)
06-02-2021
CHARLES CHATMAN, Plaintiff, v. G. CAMBERO et al., Defendants.
ORDER (1) DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND (2) DISMISSING CIVIL ACTION WITHOUT PREUDICE FOR FAILING TO PAY FILING FEE REQUIRED BY 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a)
Hon. Janis L. Sammartino United States District Judge
Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See ECF No. 1 (“Compl.”). At the time the case was filed, Plaintiff did not pay the $402 administrative and filing fee or move to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). Shortly thereafter, on March 3, 2021, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting an extension of time in which to submit the administrative and filing fee. See ECF No. 2. The Court granted Plaintiff's motion, extended the deadline to pay the fee to March 25, 2021, and explained that if Plaintiff failed to either pay the fee or file a motion to proceed IFP by that date, the Court would dismiss the case without prejudice. See ECF No. 3 at 1-2.
Although Plaintiff subsequently filed a motion to proceed IFP, see ECF No. 4 (“IFP Motion”), he has since clarified that IFP “status do[es] not pertain to [him], ” which the Court understands to mean that Plaintiff does not wish to proceed IFP in this case, see ECF No. 5 at 2. Indeed, shortly after filing the IFP Motion, Plaintiff filed a second motion seeking an extension of time in which to submit the administrative and filing fee. See Id. at 1. On April 2, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff an extension of thirty (30) days in which to submit the full fee, again noting that if Plaintiff “fails to pay the filing fee in full within the time provided, the Court will enter an order dismissing this action without prejudice for failure to pay the $402 civil filing fee.” See ECF No. 6 at 1-2 (the “Order”) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a)). Although the period in which to comply with the Order expired on May 3, 2021, Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee or sought another extension of time in which to do so.
Plaintiff appears to have submitted the IFP Motion based on a misunderstanding of the Court's order granting his first motion for extension of time. As the Court explained, Plaintiff has the option either to (1) pay the administrative and filing fee or (2) file a properly supported IFP motion-it is his choice. See ECF No. 3 at 1. Because Plaintiff has made clear, however, that he wishes to pay the administrative and filing fee and not proceed IFP, the Court DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE his IFP Motion.
Accordingly, the Court hereby:
(1) DISMISSES this action sua sponte WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to pay the $402 civil filing and administrative fee pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a);
(2) DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiffs IFP Motion (ECF No. 4); and
(3) DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to administratively close the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.