El v. State of California
- James Donato
- 3:23-cv-00128
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Antonio El v. State of California, Judge Donato dismissed the case without prejudice after plaintiffs neither properly renewed fee-waiver requests nor paid the filing fee.
The dismissal affects the pro se plaintiffs Antonio El, Marie Mairiam Bijou Bayo-El, Amirah Marie Toni White-El, and Ali Mijan Muhammed White-Bey, and ends this case without prejudice against the named defendants.
What happened
Antonio El, Marie Mairiam Bijou Bayo-El, Amirah Marie Toni White-El, and Ali Mijan Muhammed White-Bey filed a case against more than a dozen defendants. They submitted one application to waive the filing fee, signed only by Antonio El.
The court denied that application without prejudice and ordered the plaintiffs either to submit separate financial applications or pay the filing fee by April 21, 2023. They did neither. Antonio El later filed a financial statement arguing that he did not possess gold or silver coins, but the court said that point did not affect his ability to seek a fee waiver.
Judge Donato dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The court also said it would accept no further filings without prior approval.
The detailed version
- El v. State of California · No. 3:23-cv-00128
- James Donato
- Apr. 26, 2023
Background
The plaintiffs—Antonio El, Marie Mairiam Bijou Bayo-El, Amirah Marie Toni White-El, and Ali Mijan Muhammed White-Bey—proceeded without lawyers and sued more than a dozen defendants, including the State of California, the State Bar of California, and multiple individuals.
The plaintiffs filed one application to proceed without paying the filing fee. Because only Antonio El signed it, the court denied the application without prejudice and directed the plaintiffs to file separate applications containing each person's financial information, or to pay the filing fee. The deadline for doing so was April 21, 2023.
Court's Ruling
The deadline passed without the plaintiffs filing the required applications or paying the fee. Antonio El later filed an affidavit stating that he did not have gold or silver coins and referring to a constitutional provision concerning debts. The court said that the absence of gold or silver coins was not relevant to whether the plaintiffs could proceed without paying the filing fee.
Judge James Donato dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The order did not decide the claims' underlying merits. It also directed that no further filings would be accepted without the court's prior approval.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.