Rayon Jones v. J. Allen, et al.

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California

Rayon Jones v. J. Allen, et al.

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 RAYON JONES, No. 1:25-cv-01088-KES-SAB (PC) 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO PAY 12 v. FILING FEE 13 J. ALLEN, et al., Doc. 13

14 Defendants.

15 16 17 Plaintiff Rayon Jones is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action 18 pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983

. On September 3, 2025, the assigned magistrate judge issued 19 findings and recommendations recommending that, because plaintiff had accumulated three 20 strikes and because he failed to meet the imminent danger exception under

28 U.S.C. § 1915

(g), 21 plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis be denied and that plaintiff be required to pay 22 the filing fee in full to proceed with this action. Doc. 10. 23 On September 22, 2025, the Court adopted the findings and recommendations and ordered 24 plaintiff to pay the $405.00 filing fee in full within twenty-one (21) days. Doc. 13. Plaintiff was 25 warned that if he failed to pay the filing fee within the specified time, this action would be 26 dismissed without further notice.

Id. at 2

. Despite the Court’s warning, plaintiff has failed to pay 27 the required filing fee and the deadline for him to do so has expired. Without such payment, the 28 action cannot proceed before the Court. See Saddozai v. Davis,

35 F.4th 705, 709

(9th Cir. 2022). 1 Accordingly, 2 1. This action is dismissed without prejudice; 3 2. Plaintiff's renewed motion to proceed in forma pauperis, filed October 17, 2025, 4 Doc. 14, is denied as moot; and 5 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 6 7 g | IT ISSO ORDERED. _ 9 Dated: _ November 3, 2025 4h 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown