Opinion
23-cv-02243-JST
03-07-2024
MICHAEL DWAYNE HANDY, Petitioner, v. WARDEN CHRISTIAN PFEIFFER, Respondent.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
JON S. TIGAR, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
On or about April 28, 2023, Petitioner commenced this action by filing a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to either 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the Eastern District of California. ECF No. 1. On May 2, 2023, this action was transferred to this district. ECF No. 2. On May 9, 2023, Petitioner was informed that this action was deficient because Petitioner had neither paid the $5.00 filing fee nor filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 5. Petitioner was informed that the failure to respond by May 6, 2023, would result in dismissal of this action and the fee becoming due immediately. ECF No. 5. On January 4, 2024, the Court sua sponte granted Petitioner an extension of time to February 16, 2024, to either pay the $5.00 filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 10. The Court informed Petitioner that the failure to meet the February 16, 2024 deadline would result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice and without further notice to Petitioner. The deadline to either pay the filing fee or file an in forma pauperis application has passed, and Petitioner has neither corrected the deficiency nor communicated with the Court. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED for failure to either pay the filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The dismissal is without prejudice to Petitioner filing a motion to reopen the action. Any motion to reopen must be accompanied by either the filing fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis.
In this order, the Court addressed Petitioner's objections to paying the filing fee, as set forth in ECF No. 7.
For the reasons set forth above, The Court orders as follows. In accordance with Habeas Rule 2(a) and Rule 25(d)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Clerk of the Court is directed to list Warden Christian Pfeiffer as respondent because he is Petitioner's current custodian. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of Respondent and against Petitioner, and close the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.