From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Foster v. Ramey

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Nov 28, 2022
21-cv-05655-WHO (PR) (N.D. Cal. Nov. 28, 2022)

Opinion

21-cv-05655-WHO (PR)

11-28-2022

MICHAEL BARKARRI FOSTER, Plaintiff, v. RAMEY, et al., Defendants.


ORDER OF DISMISSAL

WILLIAM H. ORRICK, United States District Judge

Plaintiff Michael Barkarrri Foster has not complied with my order to pay the full filing fee by October 10, 2022. (Dkt. No. 13.) Accordingly, this federal civil rights action is DISMISSED (without prejudice) for failing to comply with my order and for failing to prosecute, see Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

Because this dismissal is without prejudice, Foster may move to reopen. Any such motion must contain full payment for the $402.00 filing fee, or, if he can no longer pay the filing fee, a new application to proceed in forma pauperis. The motion also must have the words MOTION TO REOPEN written on the first page.

The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of defendants, and close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Foster v. Ramey

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Nov 28, 2022
21-cv-05655-WHO (PR) (N.D. Cal. Nov. 28, 2022)
Case details for

Foster v. Ramey

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL BARKARRI FOSTER, Plaintiff, v. RAMEY, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Nov 28, 2022

Citations

21-cv-05655-WHO (PR) (N.D. Cal. Nov. 28, 2022)