From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Creisat v. Petal Card, Inc.

United States District Court, Central District of California
May 24, 2024
2:24-cv-01027-SVW-KS (C.D. Cal. May. 24, 2024)

Opinion

2:24-cv-01027-SVW-KS

05-24-2024

Tahani Creisat v. Petal Card, Inc.


Present: The Honorable STEPHEN V. WILSON, U.S. District Judge

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Proceedings (In Chambers):

All parties instituting a civil action, suit, or proceeding in a district court of the United States must pay a filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a party's failure to pay the filing fee only if the party is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).

On April 10, 2024, the Court postponed ruling on Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis (“Request”) because it failed to provide sufficient information to determine indigency. Dkt. 12. The Court directed Plaintiff to refile a fully completed Request or pay the filing fee, and it warned that if she did not comply within 30 days the case would be dismissed without prejudice. (Id.).

To date, Plaintiff has not responded to the Court's Order. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. See, e.g., Roberts v. Soc. Sec. Dep't, 2022 WL 4088755, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 6, 2022). All other pending matters are TERMINATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Creisat v. Petal Card, Inc.

United States District Court, Central District of California
May 24, 2024
2:24-cv-01027-SVW-KS (C.D. Cal. May. 24, 2024)
Case details for

Creisat v. Petal Card, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Tahani Creisat v. Petal Card, Inc.

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: May 24, 2024

Citations

2:24-cv-01027-SVW-KS (C.D. Cal. May. 24, 2024)