4:25-cv-09467•Rodriguez v. Jane & John Doe
Full text
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 United States District Court Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA NOE RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner, v. JANE DOE, et al., Respondents. Case No. 25-cv-09467-JST ORDER OF DISMISSAL On November 3, 2025, the Court docketed pleadings received from Mr. Rodriguez, wherein he alleged that his custody is improper and constituted kidnapping. ECF Nos. 1, 2. Because Mr. Rodriguez sought relief from this Court, the Court opened an action pursuant to this filing. That same day, the Court sent Mr. Rodriguez deficiency notices, informing him that he had not submitted his action on the proper case-initiating form and that he neither paid the filing fee, nor filed an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 3, 4. The Court instructed Mr. Rodriguez that he should cure these deficiencies by December 1, 2025 by filing his complaint on the proper form, and either paying the filing fee or filing an in forma pauperis application. Id. The Court sent Plaintiff a blank habeas petition form and a blank in forma pauperis application form. Id. The deadline has passed, and Plaintiff has not filed the required documents. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to meet these filing requirements. Judgment is entered against Plaintiff. The Clerk shall close the case. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 19, 2026 ______________________________________ JON S. TIGAR United States District Judge Case 4:25-cv-09467-JST Document 8 Filed 02/19/26 Page 1 of 1
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.