Opinion
CV 317-066
02-09-2018
BOBBY BURKE, Plaintiff, v. WHEELER CORRECTIONAL FACILITY MEDICAL DEPARTMENT AND BONDING AGENCY; PAT CLARK, Medical Administrator; and DR. WHITLEY, Dentist, Defendants.
ORDER
Plaintiff, an inmate at Baldwin State Prison in Hardwick, Georgia, is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights case concerning events at Wheeler Correctional Facility in Alamo, Georgia. On January 9, 2018, the Court directed Plaintiff to pay an initial partial filing fee of $19.33 within thirty days of the date of the Order and advised him that all prisoners, even those proceeding in forma pauperis, must pay the filing fee of $350.00 in full. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). The time for responding to the Court's January 9th Order has now expired, yet Plaintiff has failed to pay the assessed initial partial filing fee as required by the relevant provisions of the United States Code.
Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA"), prisoners granted in forma pauperis status must, when funds are available, prepay at least a partial filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1)-(2). Courts may not except indigent prisoners from prepaying this partial filing fee. See id.; see also Rivera v. Allin, 144 F.3d 719, 722 (11th Cir. 1998), abrogated on other grounds by Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007); Martin v. United States, 96 F.3d 853, 856 (7th Cir. 1996) (insisting, whenever feasible, on payment in advance of initial filing fee in every civil action covered by the PLRA). Thus, Plaintiff shall have fourteen days from the date of this Order to inform the Court of his intentions regarding this case by complying with the Court's Order directing payment of an initial filing fee of $19.33 or by showing the Court why he has not complied with the Order directing the payment. The Court DIRECTS the CLERK to immediately inform the Court of any payment of the initial filing fee which is received from Plaintiff.
If Plaintiff notifies the Court he has decided not to pursue his case and wishes to voluntarily dismiss his complaint at this time, then the case will not count as a "strike" which may later subject Plaintiff to the three-strike dismissal rule under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). It is important that Plaintiff communicate with the Court.
SO ORDERED this 9th day of February, 2018, at Augusta, Georgia.
/s/_________
BRIAN K. EPPS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA