From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ruiz v. Cisneros

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 22, 2021
1:21-cv-00759-DAD-SKO (HC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 22, 2021)

Opinion

1:21-cv-00759-DAD-SKO (HC)

06-22-2021

GUADALUPE RUIZ, Petitioner, v. T. CISNEROS, Warden, Respondent.


ORDER VACATING ORDER DIRING

PAYMENT OF FILING FEE

[Doc. 3]

SHEILA K. OBERTO. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Petitioner is a stat e prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On May 13, 2021, the Court issued an order granting Petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 3.) On June 21, 2021, Petitioner notified the Court that the order was incorrect, insofar as Petitioner was proceeding with a petition for writ of habeas corpus, not a civil rights complaint. (Doc. 12.) He states that the order incorrectly stated that he was proceeding pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and obligated to pay the $350.00 filing fee for the action. Petitioner's objections are well-taken.

Accordingly, Petitioner is authorized to proceed in forma pauperis in this habeas action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, and the order directing payment of the statutory filing fee for a civil rights action is hereby VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Ruiz v. Cisneros

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 22, 2021
1:21-cv-00759-DAD-SKO (HC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 22, 2021)
Case details for

Ruiz v. Cisneros

Case Details

Full title:GUADALUPE RUIZ, Petitioner, v. T. CISNEROS, Warden, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jun 22, 2021

Citations

1:21-cv-00759-DAD-SKO (HC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 22, 2021)