Wilnick Dorval vs Gary Davis et al.
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN WILNICK DOVAL, Plaintiff, v. GARY DAVIS, CAROL MERTENS, and RICHARD JOHNSON, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 3:20-cv-00005 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court via sua sponte review. On August 11, 2021, the Court issued an order denying Plaintiff Wilnick Dorval’s (“Dorval”) request to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 9.) The Court further ordered Dorval to pay the appropriate fees no later than twenty-one (21) days after the date of the order if he wished to proceed, failing which the court would dismiss this action. When a party is served by mail pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(C) (“A paper is served under this rule by . . . mailing it to the person’s last known address—in which event service is complete upon mailing”), the 21-day time period within which a party may respond is extended to 24 days. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d) (“When a party may or must act within a specified time after being served and service is made under Rule 5(b)(2)(C) (mail) . . . …
Download the original document · Plain text (TXT) · Browse the archive · How this archive works
Original source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-vid-3_20-cv-00005/pdf/USCOURTS-vid-3_20-cv-00005-1.pdf
SHA-256 0e118a5268dc7072af191a5ae2572d29a38ba2d5e596407b92681d5073b4e176
Re-using this document
two independent grounds: a work of the United States Government under 17 USC 105, AND a judicial opinion, which is an edict of government and uncopyrightable by anyone including the court that wrote it
Our description, tagging, arrangement, extracted text and machine transcripts are released under CC0 1.0. We assert nothing about the document itself.
Archive identifier LF-0e118a5268dc
Document text
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN WILNICK DOVAL, Plaintiff, v. GARY DAVIS, CAROL MERTENS, and RICHARD JOHNSON, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 3:20-cv-00005 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court via sua sponte review. On August 11, 2021, the Court issued an order denying Plaintiff Wilnick Dorval’s (“Dorval”) request to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 9.) The Court further ordered Dorval to pay the appropriate fees no later than twenty-one (21) days after the date of the order if he wished to proceed, failing which the court would dismiss this action. When a party is served by mail pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(C) (“A paper is served under this rule by . . . mailing it to the person’s last known address—in which event service is complete upon mailing”), the 21-day time period within which a party may respond is extended to 24 days. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d) (“When a party may or must act within a specified time after being served and service is made under Rule 5(b)(2)(C) (mail) . . . 3 days are added after the period would otherwise expire under Rule 6(a).”); The Court served Dorval with a copy of the order by mail on August 12, 2021. See Hard Copy Notice, ECF No. 10. As such, the deadline for Dorval to respond to the August 11, 2021 order was September 5, 2021. Dorval has not paid the appropriate fees to proceed with the action. Case: 3:20-cv-00005-RAM-RM Document #: 11 Filed: 09/08/21 Page 1 of 2 Dorval v. Davis et al. Case No. 3:20-cv-05 Order The premises considered, it is hereby ORDERED that the Court shall DISMISS this case; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case. Dated: September 8, 2021 /s/ Robert A. Molloy ROBERT A. MOLLOY Chief Judge Case: 3:20-cv-00005-RAM-RM Document #: 11 Filed: 09/08/21 Page 2 of 2