From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Seabrook v. Janssen Pharm. Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Mar 18, 2020
20-CV-2005 (CM) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2020)

Opinion

20-CV-2005 (CM)

03-18-2020

JAMES SEABROOK, Plaintiff, v. JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., et al., Defendants.


ORDER DIRECTING PAYMENT OF FEE OR IFP APPLICATION AND PRISONER AUTHORIZATION :

Plaintiff, currently incarcerated at Rikers Island, brings this action pro se. To proceed with a civil action in this Court, a prisoner must either pay $400.00 in fees - a $350.00 filing fee plus a $50.00 administrative fee - or, to request authorization to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), that is, without prepayment of fees, submit a signed IFP application and a prisoner authorization. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914, 1915. If the Court grants a prisoner's IFP application, the Prison Litigation Reform Act requires the Court to collect the $350.00 filing fee in installments deducted from the prisoner's account. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). A prisoner seeking to proceed in this Court without prepayment of fees must therefore authorize the Court to withdraw these payments from his account by filing a "prisoner authorization," which directs the facility where the prisoner is incarcerated to deduct the $350.00 filing fee from the prisoner's account in installments and to send to the Court certified copies of the prisoner's account statements for the past six months. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2), (b).

The $50.00 administrative fee for filing a civil action does not apply to persons granted IFP status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

Plaintiff submitted the complaint without the filing fees or a completed IFP application and prisoner authorization. Within thirty days of the date of this order, Plaintiff must either pay the $400.00 in fees or submit the attached IFP application and prisoner authorization forms. If Plaintiff submits the IFP application and prisoner authorization, they should be labeled with docket number 20-CV-2005 (CM).

Plaintiff submitted a prisoner authorization, but it is blank.

Plaintiff is cautioned that if a prisoner files an action that is dismissed as frivolous or for failing to state a claim, the dismissal is a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). A prisoner who receives three "strikes" cannot file actions in forma pauperis as a prisoner, unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury, and must pay the filing fee at the time of filing any new action.

Plaintiff also submitted the complaint without a signature. Rule 11(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that "[e]very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney's name - or by a party personally if the party is unrepresented." See also Local Civil Rule 11.1(a). The Supreme Court has interpreted Rule 11(a) to require "as it did in John Hancock's day, a name handwritten (or a mark handplaced)." Becker v. Montgomery, 532 U.S. 757, 764 (2001).

Plaintiff is directed to resubmit the signature page of the complaint with an original signature to the Court within thirty days of the date of this order. A copy of the signature page is attached to this order.

The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff and note service on the docket. No summons shall issue at this time. If Plaintiff complies with this order, the case shall be processed in accordance with the procedures of the Clerk's Office. If Plaintiff fails to comply with this order within the time allowed, the action will be dismissed.

The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that appellant demonstrates good faith when seeking review of a nonfrivolous issue). SO ORDERED. Dated: March 18, 2020

New York, New York

/s/_________

COLLEEN McMAHON

Chief United States District Judge


Summaries of

Seabrook v. Janssen Pharm. Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Mar 18, 2020
20-CV-2005 (CM) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2020)
Case details for

Seabrook v. Janssen Pharm. Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JAMES SEABROOK, Plaintiff, v. JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Mar 18, 2020

Citations

20-CV-2005 (CM) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2020)