Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06192/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06192-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Victor Almager
Defendant
Santiago Soto Espino
Plaintiff

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

Although no complaint or petition was filed, the Clerk of the Court opened a case file

comprised of the IFP application. The case was categorized as a habeas corpus action

because the IFP application includes a caption in which petitioner identifies himself as

“Petitioner” and “Victor Almager” as “Respondent.” 

2

On January 4, 2008, the Court dismissed Soto v. Almager for failure to exhaust state

remedies.

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SANTIAGO SOTO ESPINO,

Petitioner,

 vs.

VICTOR ALMAGER,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

C 07-6192 MMC(PR)

ORDER ADMINISTRATIVELY

CLOSING CASE AND

TERMINATING ALL PENDING

MOTIONS

(Docket No. 3.)

On December 6, 2007, petitioner, a California prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an

application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP application”). Petitioner did not file any other

documents with the IFP application.1

 That same date, the Court notified petitioner in writing

that the action was deficient due to petitioner’s failure to submit either a complaint or

petition. In said notice, petitioner was advised that his failure to submit a complaint or

petition within thirty days would result in dismissal of the action. Along with said notice,

petitioner was sent a copy of the Court’s habeas corpus form, instructions for completing it,

and a return envelope. 

On December 27, 2007, petitioner wrote a letter to the Court in his then-pending

habeas action, Soto v. Almager, No. C 07-5970 MMC (PR).2

 In said letter petitioner

Case 3:07-cv-06192-MMC Document 3 Filed 01/11/08 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

explains that the IFP application that was filed on December 6, 2007 was intended to be filed

in Soto v. Almager, and was not intended to be filed in a new action. 

As the instant action was opened in error when petitioner sent an IFP application

intended to be filed in his previously-filed habeas action, the Clerk of the Court shall

ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE the case and TERMINATE all pending motions. 

Because the action was opened in error, no filing fee is due. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 11, 2008

 MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-06192-MMC Document 3 Filed 01/11/08 Page 2 of 2