From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chestang v. Yahoo, Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 12, 2011
No. 2:11-cv-00989 MCE KJN PS (E.D. Cal. May. 12, 2011)

Opinion

No. 2:11-cv-00989 MCE KJN PS.

May 12, 2011


ORDER


Plaintiff Daniel K. Chestang (the "plaintiff") has filed a civil action alleging trademark infringement. (Dkt. Nos. 1, 5.) However, a review of the court's docket reflects that plaintiff has not paid the requisite filing fee of $350 or filed an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (hereinafter "IFP"). The court cannot conduct an initial review of this matter until plaintiff has either paid the filing fee or completed an IFP application. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) (a party is permitted to file a civil action in federal court without prepayment of fees or security if he makes an affidavit that he is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor); 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) ("The clerk of each district court shall require the parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in such court, whether by original process, removal or otherwise, to pay a filing fee of $350. . . ."). Therefore, plaintiff will be provided the opportunity either to submit the appropriate affidavit in support of a request to proceed in forma pauperis or to submit the appropriate filing fee.

Accordingly, plaintiff shall pay the requisite filing fee in this action no later than thirty (30) days from the date of this order. He shall include with his payment a clear indication that such payment is for the above-referenced case number, 2:11-cv-00989-MCE-KJN-PS. Alternatively, in the event that plaintiff is unable to pay the filing fee, he shall submit an IFP application, trust account statement and certificate of funds no later than thirty (30) days from the date of this order. Failure to pay the filing fee or file the requisite documents within the thirty-day deadline shall result in dismissal of this action.

The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff a blank copy of the IFP application form used in the Eastern District, along with his copy of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 11, 2011


Summaries of

Chestang v. Yahoo, Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 12, 2011
No. 2:11-cv-00989 MCE KJN PS (E.D. Cal. May. 12, 2011)
Case details for

Chestang v. Yahoo, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL K. CHESTANG, pro se litigant, and TIFFANY VIGIL, Plaintiffs, v…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: May 12, 2011

Citations

No. 2:11-cv-00989 MCE KJN PS (E.D. Cal. May. 12, 2011)