(PS)Tanksley

(PS)Tanksley v. Department of Motor Vehicle

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 8, 20202:20-cv-01732California462 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MOODY WOODROW TANKSLEY, No. 2:20-cv-01732-TLN-CKD PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff proceeds pro se. This case was referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636(b). On November 10, 2020, the undersigned ordered plaintiff, within fourteen days, either to pay the required filing and administrative fees or submit a completed application and affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 3.) The court further cautioned plaintiff that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The deadline for plaintiff to pay the required fees or submit a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis has passed, and plaintiff failed to comply with the undersigned’s order. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 allows a court to dismiss an action sua sponte for failure to prosecute or for failure to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.