Scaperotta v. State of Hawaii
Christopher Jay Scaperotta |
State of Hawaii |
1:2022cv00489 |
November 18, 2022 |
US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
J MICHAEL SEABRIGHT |
ROM TRADER |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on January 5, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 9 Prisoner Mail Returned as Undeliverable. Mail sent to Christopher Jay Scaperotta re ECF #6 Letter addressed to Judge Seabright from Christopher Jay Scaperotta, dated December 13, 2022: Returned to sender; attempted - not known, unable to forward. Stamp from correctional center indicates "inmate released". (jni) |
Filing 8 CLERK'S JUDGMENT entered on 1/3/2023 in favor of the Respondent and against Petitioner pursuant to ECF 7 ENTERING ORDER.(jni) |
Filing 7 EO: A district court may dismiss sua sponte an action for failure to comply with court rules or orders or to prosecute the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 63031 (1962); Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005). In determining whether dismissal is appropriate, district courts consider the following five factors: (1) the public's interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court's need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions. Applied Underwriters, Inc. v. Lichtenegger, 913 F.3d 884, 890 (9th Cir. 2019). On November 21, 2022, the court mailed to Petitioner an Order Denying Request for Relief from Court Filing Fees, ECF No. 2 [ECF No. 3]. The court instructed Petitioner to pay the filing fee or to submit a complete Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by a Prisoner on or before December 19, 2022. The court also warned Petitioner that failing to follow this instruction would result in automatic dismissal of this action without prejudice. It appears that Petitioner received the Order because it was not returned to the court as not deliverable. Petitioner, however, failed to pay the filing fee or to submit a complete in forma pauperis application. The court finds that the relevant factors support dismissal of this action. The public's interest in expeditious resolution of this litigation strongly favors dismissal, as does the court's need to manage its docket. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002). Moreover, allowing this action to sit idle would prejudice Respondent. See Yourish v. Cal. Amplifier, 191 F.3d 983, 99192 (9th Cir. 1999) ("Plaintiffs' paltry excuse for his default on the judge's order indicates that there was sufficient prejudice to Defendants from the delay that this factor also strongly favors dismissal."). Finally, there are currently no less drastic alternatives available. The court recognizes that the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits weighs against dismissal. Nevertheless, considering the totality of the circumstances and because the other factors favor dismissal, this factor is outweighed.The Clerk is DIRECTED to: (1) ENTER JUDGMENT in favor of the Respondent and against Petitioner, dismissing this action without prejudice; and (2) CLOSE the case. Petitioner's Request for Emergency Ultimate Release [ECF No. 6] is DENIED as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED. (JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT)(rlfh)COURTS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE - Non-Registered CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Pro Se (Non-Prisoner) Litigants that have consented to receive documents and Notices of Electronic Filings by email, have been served electronically at the e-mail address listed on the (NEF) |
COURT'S CERTIFICATE of Service - a copy of #8 Clerk's Judgment shall be served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record on 1/3/2022. Registered Participants of CM/ECF received the document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). (jni) |
Filing 6 Letter addressed to Judge Seabright from Christopher Jay Scaperotta, dated December 13, 2022, re: emergency "ultimate release". (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope) (jni) |
Filing 5 EO: Before the court is Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Legal Counsel or Inmate Advocate [ECF No. 4]. On November 18, 2022, the court issued an Order Denying Request for Relief from Court Filing Fees [ECF No. 3]. The court instructed Plaintiff to pay the filing fee associated with this action or submit a complete Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by a Prisoner on or before December 19, 2022. Plaintiff has not yet complied with the court's instruction. Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Legal Counsel or Inmate Advocate [ECF No. 4] is therefore DENIED without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. (JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT)(shm)COURT'S CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE - Non-Registered CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Pro Se (Non-Prisoner) Litigants that have consented to receive documents and Notices of Electronic Filings by email, have been served electronically at the e-mail address listed on the (NEF) |
Filing 4 MOTION (to Appoint Legal Counsel or Inmate Advocate) - by Petitioner Christopher Jay Scaperotta (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope)(jni) |
Filing 3 ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM COURT FILING FEES, ECF NO. 2 - Signed by JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT on 11/18/2022.If Scaperotta decides that he wants this action to proceed, he must pay the filing fee or submit a complete application on or before December 19, 2022. Failing to do so will result in automatic dismissal of this suit without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see also Olivares v. Marshall, 59 F.3d 109, 112 (9th Cir. 1995). The court will take no action on any past or future filings until Scaperotta pays the filing fee or is granted IFP status.The Clerk is DIRECTED to send Scaperotta an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by a Prisoner so that he can comply with this Order.COURT'S CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE - Christopher Jay Scaperotta shall be served by First Class Mail to the address of record listed on the (NEF) on 11/21/2022. Additionally, an Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis by a Prisoner form, and instructions, were included in the mailing to Petitioner.(jni) |
Filing 2 REQUEST for Relief from Court Filing Fees - by Petitioner Christopher Jay Scaperotta. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope)(jni) |
Filing 1 PETITION Under 28 U.S.C. 2254 For Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody - filed by Christopher Jay Scaperotta. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope)(jni) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Hawaii District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Scaperotta v. State of Hawaii | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner: Christopher Jay Scaperotta | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Respondent: State of Hawaii | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.