Summary
finding that "[t]he district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the action because [the petitioner] failed to pay the filing fee"
Summary of this case from Bowen v. Director of California Department of CorrectionsOpinion
No. 10-17916 D.C. No. 4:10-cv-00957-SBA
01-04-2012
TIMOTHY DOYLE YOUNG, Petitioner - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent - Appellee.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MEMORANDUM
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Saundra B. Armstrong, District Judge, Presiding
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Federal prisoner Timothy Doyle Young appeals pro se from the district court's order dismissing his petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the action because Young failed to pay the filing fee and failed to comply with the deadline set by the district court for remedying the deficiencies in his in forma pauperis application. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2); Page v. Torrey, 201 F.3d 1136, 1139 (9th Cir. 2000) ("[P]risoner-plaintiffs seeking to proceed in forma pauperis [must] submit a certified copy of their prisoner trust fund account statement for the previous six months."); James v. Madison Street Jail, 122 F.3d 27, 28 (9th Cir. 1997) ("[T]he rule for timely filing applicable to pro se prisoners . . . applies to the filing of trust-account statements as required by § 1915(a)(2).").
AFFIRMED.