From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clark v. Goldstein

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Aug 16, 2022
22-cv-03793-JSC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 16, 2022)

Opinion

22-cv-03793-JSC

08-16-2022

LOUREECE STONE CLARK, Plaintiff, v. MARK H. GOLDSTEIN, et al., Defendants.


ORDER OF DISMISSAL

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY, United States District Judge.

On June 27, 2022, Plaintiff, an inmate in Marin County Jail who is proceeding without an attorney, filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). The complaint was not signed, and the IFP motion was not complete because Plaintiff did not submit the required trust account statement. On the same day, the Clerk notified Plaintiff that she must file a signed complaint and either file a complete IFP application or pay the filing fee. The Clerk mailed Plaintiff the Court's IFP application and form complaint along with the deficiency notices, as well as a stamped return envelope and instructions for completing the forms. The notices informed her that the case would be dismissed if she did not file a signed complaint and either pay the filing fee or file a completed IFP application within 28 days. No response has been received. Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED without prejudice to filing a new action in which Plaintiff submits a signed complaint and either pays the filing fee or submits a completed IFP application.

The Clerk shall enter judgment and close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Clark v. Goldstein

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Aug 16, 2022
22-cv-03793-JSC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 16, 2022)
Case details for

Clark v. Goldstein

Case Details

Full title:LOUREECE STONE CLARK, Plaintiff, v. MARK H. GOLDSTEIN, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Aug 16, 2022

Citations

22-cv-03793-JSC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 16, 2022)