From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Romero v. Williams

United States District Court, D. Nevada
May 11, 2011
2:11-cv-00679-RLH-RJJ (D. Nev. May. 11, 2011)

Opinion

2:11-cv-00679-RLH-RJJ.

May 11, 2011


ORDER


Petitioner, a Nevada prisoner, has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (docket #1) and a petition for writ of habeas corpus (docket #s 1-1 and 1-2). Petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis is incomplete, as it does not contain a financial certificate completed by an authorized prison officer or the requisite institutional account statements. The application must therefore be denied. Petitioner will be granted time to either pay the $5.00 filing fee or submit a new, fully completed application to proceed in forma pauperis.

The court will retain the petition for writ of habeas corpus, but will not file it at this time.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (docket #1) is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner shall have thirty (30) days from the date this order is entered to either (1) pay the $5.00 filing fee or (2) submit a fully completed application to proceed in forma pauperis, including a financial certificate signed by an authorized prison officer showing the status of petitioner's prison account. Failure to take one of these actions within the time allowed may result in dismissal of this action.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall SEND to petitioner the approved form for an application to proceed in forma pauperis.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall SEND to petitioner two copies of this order. If petitioner wishes to pay the five dollar ($5) filing fee (the first option, above), petitioner must make the necessary arrangements to have one copy of this order, along with a check in the amount of the full $5 filing fee, sent to the court, by sending a copy of the order with a "brass slip" to Inmate Services for issuance of the check.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall retain the petition for a writ of habeas corpus but shall not file it at this time.

DATED this 10th day of May, 2011.


Summaries of

Romero v. Williams

United States District Court, D. Nevada
May 11, 2011
2:11-cv-00679-RLH-RJJ (D. Nev. May. 11, 2011)
Case details for

Romero v. Williams

Case Details

Full title:CARLOS LOBATO ROMERO, Petitioner, v. BRIAN WILLIAMS, et al., Respondents

Court:United States District Court, D. Nevada

Date published: May 11, 2011

Citations

2:11-cv-00679-RLH-RJJ (D. Nev. May. 11, 2011)