From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ward v. Meade

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division
Oct 5, 2016
Civil Action No. 3:16CV657 (E.D. Va. Oct. 5, 2016)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 3:16CV657

10-05-2016

TRAVIS EUGENE WARD, Plaintiff, v. BARBARA MEADE, et al., Defendants.


MEMORANDUM OPINION

By Memorandum Order entered on August 18, 2016, the Court conditionally docketed the action. At that time, the Court directed Travis Eugene Ward to affirm his intention to pay the full filing fee by signing and returning a consent to the collection of fees form. The Court warned Ward that a failure to comply with the above directive within thirty (30) days of the date of entry thereof would result in summary dismissal of the action.

Ward has not complied with the order of this Court. Ward failed to return the consent to collection of fees form. As a result, he does not qualify for in forma pauperis status. Furthermore, he has not paid the statutory filing fee for the instant action. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). Such conduct demonstrates a willful failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Accordingly, this action will be dismissed without prejudice.

The Clerk is directed to send a copy of the Memorandum Opinion to Ward.

/s/_________

Robert E. Payne

Senior United States District Judge Date: October 5, 2016
Richmond, Virginia


Summaries of

Ward v. Meade

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division
Oct 5, 2016
Civil Action No. 3:16CV657 (E.D. Va. Oct. 5, 2016)
Case details for

Ward v. Meade

Case Details

Full title:TRAVIS EUGENE WARD, Plaintiff, v. BARBARA MEADE, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division

Date published: Oct 5, 2016

Citations

Civil Action No. 3:16CV657 (E.D. Va. Oct. 5, 2016)

Citing Cases

Ward v. Meade

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by…