Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-00868/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-00868-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 540
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Mandamus and Other
Cause of Action: 28:1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus

---

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

JDDL

WO RP

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Roberto Carrillo-Bastida, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Diane J. Humetewa, et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 09-868-PHX-MHM (JRI)

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s “Motion Pursuant To Rule 9(b) of the Fed.

Rul. Cv. Proc.” (Doc. #4). The Court will grant the Motion in part and deny it in part, and

will dismiss the Petition and this action for failure to comply with the Court’s May 6, 2009

Order (Doc. #3).

I. Procedural Background

On April 23, 2009, Petitioner Roberto Carrillo-Bastida, who is confined in the

Florence Correctional Center in Florence, Arizona, filed a pro se “Mandamus Motion For

An Action To Compel An Officer Of The United States To Perform Its Duty, 29 U.S.C.

§ 1361(a)” (Doc. #1). Petitioner did not pay the $350.00 civil action filing fee or file an

Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis.

By Order filed May 6, 2009 (Doc. #3), the Court gave Petitioner 30 days from the

filing date of the Order to pay the fee or file a completed Application to Proceed In Forma

Case 2:09-cv-00868-MHM--JRI Document 5 Filed 06/29/09 Page 1 of 3
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

JDDL - 2 -

Pauperis and a certified six-month trust account statement.

II. Motion Pursuant to Rule 9(b)

On June 2, 2009, Petitioner filed a “Motion Pursuant To Rule 9(b) of the Fed. Rul. Cv.

Proc.” (Doc. #4), in which Petitioner seeks “a ruling on the merits since he is not seeking

monetary damages, this Court to order the services to respond, or in the alternative

dismis[s]al of action without prejudice so P[etitioner] can be able to refile new action.”

Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides in part that “[i]n alleging

fraud or mistake, a party must state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud

or mistake.” In his Motion, Petitioner alleges a “mistake of the mind” pursuant to Rule 9(b)

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in that he was not aware that “a ‘mandamus motion

for an action to compel the United States Marshals Services, or an officer of the United States

to perform its duty’ 28 U.S.C. § 1361(a) requires that Petitioner pay the $350.00 civil action

filing fee, or that an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis an[d] a certificate of six

months account statement needed to be file[d] with the mandamus motion.” 

While Petitioner may not have understood that an action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1361

requires payment of the $350.00 filing fee in a lump sum or, if granted the privilege of

proceeding in forma pauperis, payment of the fee incrementally as set forth in 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(b)(1), Petitioner’s lack of understanding does not relieve Petitioner of his

responsibility for the fee. Accordingly, in the absence of the filing fee being paid, or an

Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis being filed, the Court will not order a response

to the Petition or rule on the merits of the Petition as Petitioner requests in his Motion. 

Instead, as noted below, the Court will dismiss the Petition and this action for failure

to comply with the Court’s May 6, 2009 Order (Doc. #3). In so doing, however, the Court

will grant the Motion in part to the extent that Petitioner requests that the dismissal of this

action be without prejudice.

III. Failure to Comply with Court Order

In the Court’s May 6, 2009 Order (Doc. #3), Petitioner was given 30 days from the

filing date of the Order to either pay the $350.00 filing fee or file a complete Application to

Case 2:09-cv-00868-MHM--JRI Document 5 Filed 06/29/09 Page 2 of 3
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

JDDL - 3 -

Proceed In Forma Pauperis and a certified six-month trust account statement. To date, over

40 days after the Court’s Order was filed, Petitioner has failed to comply with the Order.

In the Court’s Order, Petitioner was specifically cautioned that if he failed to timely

comply with every provision of the Order, including the warnings, the Court may dismiss this

action without further notice. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir.

1992) (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the

Court). Accordingly, the Petition (Doc. #1) and this action will be dismissed without

prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to comply

with the Court’s Order filed May 6, 2009 (Doc. #3).

IT IS ORDERED:

(1) Petitioner’s “Motion Pursuant To Rule 9(b) of the Fed. Rul. Cv. Proc.” (Doc.

#4) is granted in part to the extent that Petitioner requests that the dismissal of this action

be without prejudice, and denied in part as to all other relief requested.

(2) The Petition (Doc. #1) and this action are dismissed without prejudice

pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to comply with the

Court’s Order filed May 6, 2009 (Doc. #3).

(3) The Clerk of Court must enter judgment accordingly.

DATED this 26th day of June, 2009.

Case 2:09-cv-00868-MHM--JRI Document 5 Filed 06/29/09 Page 3 of 3