Opinion
1:22-cv-00026-ADA-BAM (PC)
09-28-2022
RICHARD A. EVANS, Plaintiff, v. OURIQUE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO PAY FILING FEE
(ECF No. 21)
BARBARA A. MCAULIFFE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Richard A. Evans (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On January 6, 2022, the undersigned issued findings and recommendations that Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis be denied pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and Plaintiff be ordered to pay the $402.00 filing fee in full to proceed with this action. (ECF No. 6.) Following several extensions of time, Plaintiff filed objections on March 24, 2022 and March 28, 2022. (ECF Nos. 12, 13.) On September 12, 2022, the assigned District Judge adopted the findings and recommendations in full and ordered Plaintiff to pay the $402.00 filing fee within twenty-one days to proceed with this action. (ECF No. 18.)
Currently before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to pay the filing fee, filed September 23, 2022. (ECF No. 21.) Plaintiff requests an extension of time or a stay of his case, due to a delayed payment of his $1,200 IRS tax stimulus. Plaintiff filed a 3911 rebate 1 recovery form in August 2022. Plaintiff states that he is indigent and has been for some time, and will not be able to pay the Court's filing fee at this time, without his IRS tax stimulus rebate money. Plaintiff also requests that the Court reconsider his request to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff objects to the Court's delay in considering his objections to the findings and recommendations, and reiterates his conclusory allegations regarding the imminent danger he claims to face at his current institution. (Id.)
The Court does not find good cause to grant an extension of time for Plaintiff to pay the filing fee in this action. As Plaintiff is not proceeding in forma pauperis, he is obligated to prepay the filing fee in full in order to proceed with this action. Plaintiff filed this action on January 6, 2022. (ECF No. 1.) There is no indication that Plaintiff expected to receive funds from the IRS before January 6, 2022 to pay the filing fee when the suit was filed, and Plaintiff provides no indication that he will receive the expected funds in a timely manner from the IRS. Finally, Plaintiff has identified no caselaw-and the Court is aware of none-entitling him to additional time or a stay of this action until he can acquire the necessary funds.
The Court further does not find any basis for overturning the denial of Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff does not set forth any new evidence or arguments in his motion that were not previously raised and considered by the Court, and reconsideration of the Court's earlier finding is therefore not appropriate. See Local Rule 230(j) (when seeking reconsideration of an order, a party must show “what new or different facts or circumstances are claimed to exist which did not exist or were not shown upon such prior motion, or what other grounds exist for the motion”).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
1. Plaintiff's motion for extension of time to pay the filing fee, (ECF No. 21), is DENIED;
2. Pursuant to the District Judge's September 12, 2022 order, (ECF No. 18), Plaintiff must pay the $402.00 filing fee in full, on or before October 6, 2022, to proceed with this action; and 2
3. If Plaintiff fails to pay the filing fee within the specified time, this action will be dismissed without further notice.
IT IS SO ORDERED. 3