Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Steven Louis Poslof v. Honorable F. Dana Walton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 2, 2012

STEVEN LOUIS POSLOF,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
HONORABLE F. DANA WALTON, ROBERT BROWN DA, ESQ., CHP OFFICER D.P. SWEENEY 18088, SUPERIOR COURT MARIPOSA COUNTY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY MARIPOSA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL AREA 455, COUNTY OF MARIPOSA, "AND ALL OTHER JOHN DOES."
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence J. O'Neill United States District Judge

ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Plaintiff Steven Poslof ("Plaintiff"), an individual proceeding pro se, filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (the "IFP Motion"). (Doc. 2.) On March 2, 2012, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations recommending the IFP Motion be denied, citing Plaintiff's lack of candor and cavalier treatment of his poverty status in completing his IFP Motion. (Doc. 24, 4: 18-19.) The Magistrate Judge also recommended that Plaintiff be required to pay a reduced filing fee of $200.00. (Doc. 24, 6: 4.)

On March 5, 2012, Plaintiff filed a "Motion for Clarification." (Doc. 25.) Based on the content of the pleading, however, the Court construes the Motion for Clarification as a Motion to issue summons and affect service of Plaintiff's Complaint. See generally, Doc. 25. Plaintiff supplemented his briefing for this request on March 26, 2012. (Doc. 28.)

On March 21, 2012, the undersigned issued an order adopting the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations, ordering Plaintiff to submit the reduced filing fee of $200. (Doc. 27.) The Court further admonished Plaintiff that failure to tender the reduced filing fee would result in immediate dismissal of Plaintiff's claims. (Doc. 27.) As of the date of this Order, Plaintiff has not submitted the required filing fee.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's Motion to issue summons and affect service of Plaintiff's complaint is DENIED as Moot; and

2. Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

The clerk is directed to close this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120402

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.