(PC)Weaver v. Rios, No. 1:2016cv00596 - Document 15 (E.D. Cal. 2016)

Court Description: ORDER DENYING 13 Motion to Proceed IFP, REQUIRING Plaintiff to Pay $400.00 Filing Fee in Full within Twenty-One Days;ORDER ADOPTING 14 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 11/14/2016. (21-Day Deadline)(Martin-Gill, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 WILLIE WEAVER, Case No. 1:16-cv-00596-AWI-MJS (PC) 9 Plaintiff, 10 v. 11 RIOS, 12 Defendant. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO: 1. DENY PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 2. REQUIRE PLAINTIFF TO PAY FILING FEE IN FULL WITHIN TWENTY-ONE DAYS 13 (ECF Nos. 13, 14) 14 TWENTY-ONE DAY DEADLINE TO PAY FEE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff initiated this action on April 28, 2016. (ECF No. 1.) On May 3, 2016, the Magistrate Judge assigned to this case issued an order directing Plaintiff to submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) or pay the filing fee within forty-five days. (ECF No. 4.) After the forty-five days passed and Plaintiff had neither paid the fee nor filed an application to proceed IFP, the Magistrate Judge issued an order for Plaintiff to show cause why his action should not be dismissed for failure to pay the filing fee or an application to proceed IFP. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff’s response to the order to show cause set forth the reasons why Plaintiff believed he was entitled to IFP status. (ECF No. 11.) The Magistrate Judge, noting that these arguments were premature since Plaintiff had still not filed an application to proceed IFP, issued a second order directing Plaintiff to pay the fee or file an application to proceed IFP. (ECF No. 12.) 1 1 2 3 4 5 On September 26, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion to proceed IFP. (ECF No. 13.) On September 27, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations (“F&R”) to deny Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed IFP pursuant to the “three strike rule” and to require Plaintiff to pay the filing fee in full within twenty-one days. (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiff was granted fourteen days to file objections to the F&R. Id. 6 7 More than fourteen days have passed and Plaintiff has filed no objections, nor has he sought an extension of time to do so. 8 9 10 11 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, the Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 12 13 14 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. 15 16 17 ADOPTED in full; 2. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 13) is DENIED; 3. Plaintiff shall pay the $400 filing fee in full within twenty-one days of entry of this 18 19 20 The findings and recommendations filed on September 27, 2016 (ECF No. 14) are order; and 4. If Plaintiff fails to pay the $400 filing fee in full by the above deadline, all pending motions will be terminated and the action dismissed without further notice. 21 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 Dated: November 14, 2016 24 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.