UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:24-cv-00398 Jay Williams, Plaintiff, V. Department of Justice, Defendant.

ORDER Plaintiff Jay Williams, proceeding pro se, filed this civil law- suit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. He did not pay the filing fee. At the time of filing, plaintiff was an inmate of the Henderson County Jail. The case was transferred to this court for proper venue and referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell pursuant to 28 USS.C. § 636(b). On October 24, 2024, the magistrate judge issued a report rec- ommending that the court bar plaintiff from proceeding zn forma pauperis pursuant to

(g) and dismiss this case as barred by the sanctions previously imposed by this court, which prohibit him from filing any lawsuit without representation by li- censed counsel and full prepayment of the filing fee. Doc. 5. A copy of the report was mailed to plaintiff’s address. He did not file written objections. When no party objects to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the court reviews it only for clear error. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n,

(5th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report, and being satisfied that it contains no clear error, the court accepts its find- ings and recommendation. Plaintiff is denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and this case is dismissed without prejudice. Any pending motions are denied as moot.

-l-

Lastly, “the obligation of a filing fee attaches at the time of filing and the obligation remains despite the disposition of the case.” Johnson v. Rhodes,

,

, at *1 (5th Cir. Jun. 14, 2000) (unpublished). Because plaintiff is ineligi- ble to proceed 7m forma pauperis, he owes the full filing fee of $405, which the magistrate judge shall assess by separate order. So ordered by the court on February 6, 2025. _facbod BARKER United States District Judge

-2-