Duffield
v.
Bear

This case is not covered by Casetext's citator
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMAAug 6, 2018
No. CIV-18-739-SLP (W.D. Okla. Aug. 6, 2018)

No. CIV-18-739-SLP

08-06-2018

WESLEY DUFFIELD, Petitioner, v. FNU BEAR, Warden, Respondent.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

With his Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254 Petitioner has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. #5) and supporting documents. Having reviewed said motion, the undersigned finds that Petitioner has sufficient financial resources to pay the $5.00 filing fee. Because he does not qualify for authorization to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, Petitioner's motion should be denied, and he should be required to pay the full filing fee for this action to proceed.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing findings, it is recommended that the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. #5) be DENIED and the action be dismissed without prejudice unless Petitioner pays the full filing fee to the Clerk of the Court by August 23 , 2018. Petitioner is advised of his right to file an objection to this Report and Recommendation with the Clerk of this Court by August 27 , 2018, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and LCvR 72.1. The failure to timely object to this Report and Recommendation would waive appellate review of the recommended ruling. Moore v. United States of America, 950 F.2d 656 (10th Cir. 1991); cf. Marshall v. Chater, 75 F.3d 1421, 1426 (10 Cir. 1996) ("Issues raised for the first time in objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation are deemed waived.").

This Report and Recommendation disposes of all issues referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge in the captioned matter.

ENTERED this 6 day of August, 2018.

/s/_________


GARY M. PURCELL


UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE