From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wells v. Nooth

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Jan 13, 2017
Case No. 2:16-cv-00758-JE (D. Or. Jan. 13, 2017)

Opinion

Case No. 2:16-cv-00758-JE

01-13-2017

LEROY LAMONT WELLS, Plaintiff, v. MARK NOOTH, et al., Defendants.


ORDER TO DISMISS

On December 5, 2016, the court determined that plaintiff is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis in this case. As a result, the court advised him that if he did not pay the $400.00 filing fee within 30 days, it would dismiss his case. Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee, but instead objects to the court's Order denying him in forma pauperis status, moves to amend his pleading, and moves for a preliminary injunction. None of these filings justify extending in forma pauperis status to plaintiff. Where plaintiff is not entitled to in forma pauperis status, and where he has not paid the $400.00 filing fee, the court dismisses this case without prejudice.

CONCLUSION

The court dismisses this case based upon plaintiff's failure to pay the $400.00 filing fee. Plaintiff's pending Motion to Amend (#41) and Motion for Preliminary Injunction (#42) are denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 13 day of January, 2017.

/s/_________

Marco A. Hernandez

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Wells v. Nooth

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Jan 13, 2017
Case No. 2:16-cv-00758-JE (D. Or. Jan. 13, 2017)
Case details for

Wells v. Nooth

Case Details

Full title:LEROY LAMONT WELLS, Plaintiff, v. MARK NOOTH, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Date published: Jan 13, 2017

Citations

Case No. 2:16-cv-00758-JE (D. Or. Jan. 13, 2017)