IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 22, 2011
HUNG DUONG NGUON,
TIM V. VIRGA, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and no other party has been served or appeared in the action.
On May 11, 2011, the court issued an order directing petitioner to show cause within 30 days why this action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with court rules and orders. In that order, the court stated:
On April 6, 2011, the court directed petitioner to submit either a completed application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis or the full filing fee for this action within 30 days. Petitioner was warned that failure to comply may result in dismissal of this action for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court rules and orders. See Local Rule 110. To date, petitioner has failed to comply.
Petitioner was ordered to show cause, within 30 days of the date of that order, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to resolve the fee status. Petitioner has not filed a response to the order to show cause or resolved the fee status of this case. Accordingly, this action is dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment of dismissal and close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.