(HC) Tejeda v. California Highway Patrol ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PEDRO JOSE TEJEDA, No. 2:22-cv-1213 DB P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER AND 14 CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 naming the California Highway Patrol as respondent. Petitioner 19 did not, however, file an in forma pauperis affidavit or pay the required filing fee ($5.00). See 28 20 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a); 1915(a). 21 By order dated September 2, 2022, petitioner was granted thirty days to either submit an 22 affidavit in support of a request to proceed in forma pauperis or to submit the appropriate filing 23 fee. (ECF No. 4.) Petitioner was cautioned that failure to comply with that order would result in a 24 recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Id.) Petitioner has not submitted an affidavit in 25 support of a request to proceed in forma pauperis, has not paid the filing fee, and has not 26 otherwise responded to the court’s order. 27 A party instituting an application for writ of habeas corpus in the district court must pay a 28 filing fee of $5. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a petitioner’s failure to 1 | prepay the entire fee if the petitioner is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 2 | U.S.C. § 1915(a). Despite being provided with additional time in which to do so, petitioner has 3 | neither paid the $5 filing fee nor submitted a request to proceed in forma pauperis. Therefore, this 4 | action should be dismissed for failure to pay the required filing fee. 5 For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk shall assign a 6 | district judge to this case. 7 In addition, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this case be dismissed without 8 | prejudice for petitioner’s failure to pay the filing fee. 9 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 10 | assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within thirty days after 11 | being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written objections 12 | with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 13 | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that 14 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 15 | Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 16 | Dated: November 7, 2022 18 9 teje1213.156ifp BORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28