Opinion
2:22-cv-1213 DB P
11-07-2022
PEDRO JOSE TEJEDA, Petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, Respondent.
ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
DEBORAH BARNES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 naming the California Highway Patrol as respondent. Petitioner did not, however, file an in forma pauperis affidavit or pay the required filing fee ($5.00). See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a); 1915(a).
By order dated September 2, 2022, petitioner was granted thirty days to either submit an affidavit in support of a request to proceed in forma pauperis or to submit the appropriate filing fee. (ECF No. 4.) Petitioner was cautioned that failure to comply with that order would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Id.) Petitioner has not submitted an affidavit in support of a request to proceed in forma pauperis, has not paid the filing fee, and has not otherwise responded to the court's order.
A party instituting an application for writ of habeas corpus in the district court must pay a filing fee of $5. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a petitioner's failure to 1 prepay the entire fee if the petitioner is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Despite being provided with additional time in which to do so, petitioner has neither paid the $5 filing fee nor submitted a request to proceed in forma pauperis. Therefore, this action should be dismissed for failure to pay the required filing fee.
For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk shall assign a district judge to this case.
In addition, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this case be dismissed without prejudice for petitioner's failure to pay the filing fee.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within thirty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 2