Opinion
23-cv-04883-JST
04-15-2024
KEVIN LEE MCCULLOM, Plaintiff, v. ALAMEDA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY, et al., Defendants.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
JON S. TIGAR United States District Judge.
On or about September 25, 2023, Plaintiff commenced this action by filing a pleading with the Court, requesting to “open up a fully exhausted 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaints filing.” ECF No. 1. Because Plaintiff sought relief from this Court, the Court opened an action pursuant to this filing. That same day, the Court sent Plaintiff a notice that the action was deficient because (1) he had not submitted his action on the proper case-initiating form, specifically a civil rights complaint by a prisoner form; and (2) he had not paid the filing fee or filed an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 2, 3. The Court informed Plaintiff that he should correct this deficiency by October 23, 2023, or the action would be dismissed. Id. The Court sent Plaintiff a blank complaint form and a blank in forma pauperis application form. Id.
On November 1, 2023, Plaintiff filed a complaint on the proper form. ECF No. 7. However, Plaintiff reported that the Merced County Sheriff's Office was preventing him from making the copies needed to prepare his in forma pauperis application. ECF Nos. 9, 10. In response, the Court granted Plaintiff an extension of time to December 8, 2023, to file his in forma pauperis application and requested that the Merced County Sheriff's Office assist Plaintiff in preparing his in forma pauperis application. ECF No. 11. Plaintiff continued to report that the Merced County Sheriff's Office was preventing him from filing an in forma pauperis application. ECF Nos. 14-16. However, the Court noted that Plaintiff had been able to file an in forma pauperis application in his other case pending before this Court. See McCullom v. Alameda Cty District Att'y's Office, C No. 23-cv-06553 JST, Dkt. No. 6. The Court granted Plaintiff an extension of time to April 4, 2024, to file an in forma pauperis application to the best of his ability.
The deadline has passed, and Plaintiff has not filed an in forma pauperis application, or paid the filing fee. Plaintiff has not communicated with the Court since January 12, 2024. ECF No. 17. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED for failure to either pay the filing fee or file a complete in forma pauperis application. The dismissal is without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a motion to reopen the action. Any motion to reopen must be accompanied by either the filing fee or a complete in forma pauperis application. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff, terminate all pending motions as moot, and close the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.