From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. Washington

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE
Sep 24, 2018
Case No. C18-916-RAJ-JPD (W.D. Wash. Sep. 24, 2018)

Opinion

Case No. C18-916-RAJ-JPD

09-24-2018

MARIO LAMONT HARRIS, Petitioner, v. STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Proceeding pro se, plaintiff has filed a proposed habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. By letter dated June 22, 2018, plaintiff was granted 30 days to either pay the filing fee or submit a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP"), along with a certified copy of his prison trust account statement showing transactions for the past six months. Dkt. 2. On July 5, 2018, petitioner filed an incomplete IFP application. Dkt. 4. By letter dated July 6, 2018, plaintiff was granted 30 days to correct the IFP deficiency. Dkt. 5. Plaintiff was advised that failure to respond to the letter by August 6, 2018, could result in dismissal of the case. Id. On July 9, 2018, petitioner filed two motions. Dkts. 6 & 7. On July 12, 2018, the Court's July 6, 2018 letter was returned as undeliverable. Dkt. 8.

To date, petitioner has not provided the Court with an updated address, paid the filing fee, or submitted a completed IFP application. Accordingly, the Court recommends this action be DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914, and for failure to prosecute pursuant to Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 41(b) (court may dismiss action for failure to prosecute if mail is returned as undeliverable and party does not update address within 60 days). The pending motions, Dkts. 6 & 7, should be DENIED as moot. A proposed order accompanies this Report and Recommendation.

Objections to this Report and Recommendation, if any, should be filed with the Clerk and served upon all parties to this suit by no later than October 15, 2018. Failure to file objections within the specified time may affect your right to appeal. Objections should be noted for consideration on the District Judge's motion calendar for the third Friday after they are filed. Responses to objections may be filed within fourteen (14) days after service of objections. If no timely objections are filed, the matter will be ready for consideration by the District Judge on October 19, 2018.

This Report and Recommendation is not an appealable order. Thus, a notice of appeal seeking review in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit should not be filed until the assigned District Judge acts on this Report and Recommendation.

Dated this 24th day of September, 2018.

/s/_________

JAMES P. DONOHUE

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Harris v. Washington

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE
Sep 24, 2018
Case No. C18-916-RAJ-JPD (W.D. Wash. Sep. 24, 2018)
Case details for

Harris v. Washington

Case Details

Full title:MARIO LAMONT HARRIS, Petitioner, v. STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

Date published: Sep 24, 2018

Citations

Case No. C18-916-RAJ-JPD (W.D. Wash. Sep. 24, 2018)