Bautista v. Experian
This text of Bautista v. Experian (Bautista v. Experian) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1 2 FILED IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 3 Aug 04, 2022 4 SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 6
7 TRACEY BAUTISTA, NO. 1:22-CV-3085-TOR 8 Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT 9 v. PREJUDICE
10 EXPERIAN,
11 Defendant. 12
13 BEFORE THE COURT is Plaintiff’s Complaint and the Clerk’s Notice of 14 Deficient Filing. ECF Nos. 1, 3. The Court has reviewed the record and files 15 herein and is fully informed. For the reasons discussed below, this action is 16 dismissed without prejudice. 17 On June 22, 2022, Plaintiff filed a pro se complaint against Experian under 18 the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681, without payment of the 19 mandatory filing fee or the filing of an application to proceed in forma pauperis. 20 On that same date, Plaintiff was advised of this deficiency and was advised that the 1 case was subject to dismissal if the filing fee or appropriate application to proceed 2 in forma pauperis was not filed by July 6, 2022. ECF No. 3.
3 To date, Plaintiff has not complied with the filing fee or application to 4 proceed in forma pauperis. 5 Parties filing actions in the United States District Court are required to pay
6 filing fees. 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed without the immediate 7 payment of a filing fee only upon granting of in forma pauperis status. See 28 8 U.S.C. § 1915. Failure to pay the statutory filing fee will result in dismissal of the 9 action without prejudice. See Olivares v. Marshall, 59 F.3d 109, 112 (9th Cir.
10 1995) (district court has authority to dismiss without prejudice prisoner complaint 11 for failure to pay partial filing fee); In re Perroton, 958 F.2d 889, 890 (9th Cir. 12 1992) (affirming dismissal of appeal of pro se litigant for failure to pay required
13 filing fees). 14 ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 15 This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failing to pay the filing 16 fee or filing a properly completed Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
17 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a) and 1915(a). 18 // 19 //
20 // 1 The District Court Executive is directed to enter this Order, enter judgment 2|| accordingly, furnish a copy to Plaintiff at her address of record, and CLOSE the file. 4 DATED August 4, 2022.
6 =— THOMAS ex <= United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bautista v. Experian, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bautista-v-experian-waed-2022.