Whitfield v. State of California ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ANDREW WHITFIELD, 7 Case No. 23-cv-04162-AMO (PR) Petitioner, 8 ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT v. PREJUDICE 9 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 10 Respondent. 11 12 This suit was reassigned from a magistrate judge to the undersigned in light of Ninth Circuit 13 authority.1 On August 16, 2023, Petitioner Andrew Whitfield, a federal inmate, filed a document 14 with the Court in the instant case, which was opened as a habeas corpus action. Dkt. 1. On the 15 same day the action was filed, the Clerk of the Court sent a notice to Whitfield informing him that 16 his action could not go forward until he filed with the Court a habeas corpus petition form, 17 completed in full, within twenty-eight days or Whitfield’s action would be dismissed. The Clerk 18 also sent Whitfield another notice directing him to either pay the filing fee or file a completed 19 prisoner’s in forma pauperis (“IFP”) application. The Clerk sent Whitfield a blank IFP 20 application and told him that he must pay the fee or return the completed application within 21 twenty-eight days or his action would be dismissed. 22 More than twenty-eight days have passed, and Whitfield has not filed his petition, paid the 23 filing fee, returned the IFP application, or otherwise communicated with the Court. 24 // 25 // 26 27 1 Williams v. King, 875 F.3d 500, 503 (9th Cir. 2017) (concluding that magistrate judge 1 Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk shall 2 || terminate all pending motions and close the file. 3 This Order terminates Docket No. 1. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 Dated: DEcember 22, 2023 HO - ARACELI MARTINEZ-OLGUIN 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 a 12 13 14 ° 15 16 17 Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28