Alexander v. Baron et al, No. 3:2021cv00092 - Document 7 (E.D. Va. 2021)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. See Opinion for details. Signed by District Judge M. Hannah Lauck on 5/18/2021. (sbea,)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Alexander v. Baron et al Doc. 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division JOSHUA ALEXANDER, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 3:21CV92 V. JOSEPH BARON, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, a Virginia inmate, has submitted this civil action. He also has applied to proceed in forma pauperis. Accordingly, by Memorandum Order entered on March 4, 2021, the Court directed Petitioner to complete and return certain forms ifhe wished to proceed informa pauperis, or to pay the full $402.00 filing fee. On March 22, 2021, the Court received an in forma pauperis affidavit from Petitioner with a note that states: "I no longer want to proceed in forma pauperis." (ECF No. 4, at 1 (emphasis omitted).) However, Plaintiff completed and returned both the in forma pauperis affidavit and the consent to collection of fees form. By Memorandum Order entered on April 13, 2021, the Court explained that if Plaintiff no longer desired to apply to proceed in forma pauperis then he must pay the $402.00 filing fee. The Court ordered that, within eleven ( 11) days of the date of entry thereof, Plaintiff must submit the full $350.00 filing fee and the $52.00 administrative fee. The Court explained that, in the alternative, if Plaintiff instead chose to proceed informa pauperis, he must notify the Court of his renewed intent to do so within eleven (11) days. Finally, the Court explained that if Plaintiff failed to comply with either of the above directives, the Court would dismiss the action without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4l(b). Dockets.Justia.com More than eleven ( 11) days have elapsed and Plaintiff has not responded to the April 13. 202 1 Memorandum Order. Accordingly. this action will be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. An appropriate Order shall accompany thi s Memorandum Opinion. M }r ~ I Date: Richmond, Virginia 21>1-I 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.
