Opinion
22-cv-08918 BLF
02-03-2023
GARY L. SMITH, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO, et. al., Defendants.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
BETH LABSON FREEMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On December 16, 2022, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Dkt. No. 1. Plaintiff also filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). Dkt. No. 2. On the same day, the Clerk sent Plaintiff a notice informing him that the IFP application he filed was insufficient because he did not submit the proper form and the necessary supporting documents. Dkt. No. 4. Plaintiff was provided with a blank copy of the Court's IFP application and directed to respond within twenty-eight days to avoid dismissal. Id.
The deadline passed, and Plaintiff failed to respond. The matter was reassigned to this Court on January 18, 2023. Dkt. No. 6. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee. The Clerk shall terminate all pending motions and close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.