From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Robinson v. Acting Warden

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jan 6, 2022
2:21-cv-09831-JAK-MAA (C.D. Cal. Jan. 6, 2022)

Opinion

2:21-cv-09831-JAK-MAA

01-06-2022

Hugh Robinson v. Acting Warden


Proceedings (In Chambers):Order re: Filing Fee or Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis

Present: The Honorable MARIA A. AUDERO, United States Magistrate Judge

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

THE HONORABLE MARIA A. AUDERO, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On December 20, 2021, the Court received and filed Petitioner Hugh Robinson's (“Petitioner”), pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (“Section 2241”) (“Petition”). (Pet., ECF No. 1.)

Rule 3(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts (“Habeas Rules”), which applies to Petitioner's federal habeas petition through Rule 1(b) of the Habeas Rules, requires that a habeas petition be accompanied by the applicable filing fee or a request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis including a certificate from an authorized officer of the petitioner's institution showing the amount of money or securities in the petitioner's institutional account. Here, Petitioner's has neither paid the $5 filing fee nor submitted a request to proceed in forma pauperis. (See Pet.)

Petitioner is ORDERED to submit, by no later than February 7, 2022, either (1) the filing fee of $5 or (2) a completed request to proceed in forma pauperis with the required supporting documentation. A form Declaration in Support of Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is attached to this Order.

Alternatively, Petitioner may voluntarily dismiss this action without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). The Clerk is directed to attach Form CV-09 (Notice of Dismissal Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(a) or (c)) to this Order to Show Cause.

Petitioner is expressly cautioned that failure to respond to this Order by February 7, 2022 will result in a recommendation that the Petition be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with a court order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). See, e.g., Young v. United States, 465 Fed.Appx. 597, 598 (9th Cir. 2012) (affirming dismissal of habeas petition for failure to pay filing fee or submit complete request to proceed in forma pauperis); Culler v. Bd. of Prison Terms, 405 Fed.Appx. 263, 264 (9th Cir. 2010) (same).

It is so ordered.

Attachments:

Form CV-27, pp. 6-7 (Declaration in Support of Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis)

Form CV-09 (Notice of Dismissal Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(a) or (c))


Summaries of

Robinson v. Acting Warden

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jan 6, 2022
2:21-cv-09831-JAK-MAA (C.D. Cal. Jan. 6, 2022)
Case details for

Robinson v. Acting Warden

Case Details

Full title:Hugh Robinson v. Acting Warden

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Jan 6, 2022

Citations

2:21-cv-09831-JAK-MAA (C.D. Cal. Jan. 6, 2022)