Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00079/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00079-7/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Baron Bower
Plaintiff
Foster Farms
Defendant

Document 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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BARON BOWER,

Plaintiff,

v.

FOSTER FARMS,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:15-cv-00079-GEB-SAB

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR 

FAILURE TO PAY THE FILING FEE

(ECF No. 24)

Plaintiff Baron Bower (“Plaintiff”), appearing pro se, filed the complaint in this 

action on January 16, 2015, seeking to set aside a settlement agreement in a 2002 employment 

action. (ECF No. 1.) On April 15, 2015, Plaintiff’s application to proceed without prepayment 

of fees was denied, and Plaintiff was ordered to pay the filing fee within twenty one days. (ECF 

No. 23.) Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee, but filed a motion to dismiss on May 8, 2015. (ECF 

No. 24.) Plaintiff states that he does not want to pay the filing fee and requests that this action be 

dismissed. However, Plaintiff also requests that the Court determine the award that he is entitled 

to in his underlying employment action. Plaintiff requests that the Court order relief because he 

has only received gross underpayment for his claims back in 2002-2003. 

Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with 

these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any 

and all sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” The Court has the inherent power 

Case 1:15-cv-00079-GEB-SAB Document 25 Filed 05/19/15 Page 1 of 2
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

2

to control its docket and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate, 

including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 

2000). This action shall be dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the April 15, 2015 

order to pay the filing fee.

Plaintiff is advised that since he is seeking dismissal rather than paying the filing 

fee, he is not entitled to any relief in this action.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This action is dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fee;

2. All pending motions are terminated; and 

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this action.

Dated: May 18, 2015

Case 1:15-cv-00079-GEB-SAB Document 25 Filed 05/19/15 Page 2 of 2