From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chapman v. Bolanos

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Mar 10, 2022
22-cv-00808-HSG (N.D. Cal. Mar. 10, 2022)

Opinion

22-cv-00808-HSG

03-10-2022

MARCEL E. CHAPMAN, Plaintiff, v. CARLOS G. BOLANOS, et al., Defendants.


ORDER OF DISMISSAL

HAYWOODS. GILLIAM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On February 8, 2022, Plaintiff filed this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Dkt. No. 1. That same day, the Clerk of the Court informed Plaintiff that this action was deficient because Plaintiff had not paid the filing fee or filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Dkt. No. 3. Plaintiff was instructed to respond within twenty-eight days of the date of the order. Dkt. No. 3. The deadline has passed, and Plaintiff has neither paid the filing fee nor filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court therefore DISMISSES this action without prejudice. Because this dismissal is without prejudice, Plaintiff may move to reopen the action. Any such motion must be accompanied by either the filing fee or an in forma pauperis application on the proper form with the required supporting documents. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of Defendants and close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Chapman v. Bolanos

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Mar 10, 2022
22-cv-00808-HSG (N.D. Cal. Mar. 10, 2022)
Case details for

Chapman v. Bolanos

Case Details

Full title:MARCEL E. CHAPMAN, Plaintiff, v. CARLOS G. BOLANOS, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Mar 10, 2022

Citations

22-cv-00808-HSG (N.D. Cal. Mar. 10, 2022)