Young v. Davis

Full title: TIMOTHY DOYLE YOUNG, Applicant, v. WARDEN DAVIS, Respondent.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Oct 31, 2011

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02443-BNB (D. Colo. Oct. 31, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02443-BNB

10-31-2011

TIMOTHY DOYLE YOUNG, Applicant, v. WARDEN DAVIS, Respondent.

LEWIS T. BABCOCK

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, Timothy Doyle Young, is in the custody of the United States Bureau of Prisons and currently is incarcerated at ADX in Florence, Colorado. Mr. Young, acting pro se, initiated this action by filing a document titled "Habeas Corpus Ad Testificandum." In an order entered on September 22, 2011, Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland found that Mr. Young is asserting conditions of confinement claims rather than habeas corpus claims.

Magistrate Judge Boland construed the action as filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and instructed Mr. Young to submit his claims on a Court-approved form used in filing prisoner complaints. Mr. Young also was instructed to submit to the Court a Prisoner's Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and a certified copy of his inmate trust fund account statement for the six months prior to the filing of the instant action, if he desired to proceed in forma pauperis. Otherwise, he was directed to pay the $350.00 filing fee prior to proceeding in this action.

Upon review of the document Mr. Young submitted, the Court agrees that Mr. Young's claims properly are asserted in a prisoner complaint. Mr. Young now has failed to comply with the September 22 Order within the time allowed. He has failed to submit his claims on a Court-approved form used in filing prisoner complaints, and he has failed to submit a proper 28 U.S.C. § 1915 Motion and Affidavit along with a certified trust fund account statement for the six months preceding the filing date of this action. Therefore, the Complaint and action will be dismissed. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the action is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. 41(b) for failure to comply with the September 22, 2011 Order and cure deficiencies.

DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 31st day of October, 2011.

BY THE COURT:

LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge

United States District Court