Opinion
No. 16-1298-JDT-cgc
11-18-2016
RONNIE QUENTIN BROWN, Plaintiff, v. GRIER, ET AL., Defendants.
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO COMPLY WITH 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1)-(2) OR PAY THE $400 CIVIL FILING FEE
On November 17, 2016, Plaintiff Ronnie Quentin Brown, Tennessee Department of Correction prisoner number 415080, who is incarcerated at the Hardeman County Correctional Facility in Whiteville, Tennessee, filed a pro se civil complaint. (ECF No. 1.) However, Plaintiff neglected to submit either the $400 civil filing fee required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a)-(b) or an application to proceed in forma pauperis.
Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA"), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a)-(b), a prisoner bringing a civil action must pay the filing fee required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). Although the obligation to pay the fee accrues at the moment the case is filed, see McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 605 (6th Cir. 1997), partially overruled on other grounds by LaFountain v. Harry, 716 F.3d 944, 951 (6th Cir. 2013), the PLRA provides the prisoner the opportunity to make a "down payment" of a partial filing fee and pay the remainder in installments. Id. at 604. However, in order to take advantage of the installment procedures, the prisoner must complete and submit to the district court, along with the complaint, an in forma pauperis affidavit and a certified copy of his inmate trust account statement for the last six months. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2).
Twenty-eight U.S.C. § 1914(a) requires a civil filing fee of $350. However, pursuant to § 1914(b), "[t]he clerk shall collect from the parties such additional fees . . . as are prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States." The Judicial Conference has prescribed an additional administrative fee of $50 for filing any civil case, except for cases seeking habeas corpus and cases in which the plaintiff is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Thus, if Plaintiff is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, he will not be liable for the additional $50 fee.
In a letter submitted with his complaint, Plaintiff asserts that he has attempted to get his affidavit of indigency filled out by the trust fund officer, but has been told it is the wrong form. (ECF No. 3.) While Plaintiff will not be penalized for a prison official's refusal to provide him with the necessary documentation, the Court will first require him to make additional efforts to obtain the paperwork.
Even if Plaintiff is unable to obtain a certification of his trust account statement, he should complete, sign, and return the 2-page in forma pauperis application and confirm to the Court that prison officials would not provide him with a copy of his trust account statement.
Therefore, Plaintiff is ORDERED to submit, within 30 days after the date of this order, either the entire $400 civil filing fee or a properly completed and executed application to proceed in forma pauperis and a certified copy of his inmate trust account statement for the last six months. The Clerk is directed to mail Plaintiff a copy of the prisoner in forma pauperis affidavit form along with this order. If Plaintiff needs additional time to submit the necessary documents, he may, within 30 days after the date of this order, file a motion for an extension of time.
If Plaintiff timely submits the necessary documents and the Court finds that he is indeed indigent, the Court will grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and assess only a $350 filing fee in accordance with the installment procedures of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). However, if Plaintiff fails to comply with this order in a timely manner the Court will deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, assess the entire $400 filing fee from his inmate trust account without regard to the installment payment procedures, and dismiss the action without further notice for failure to prosecute, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). McGore, 114 F.3d at 605. IT IS SO ORDERED.
Even a voluntary dismissal by Plaintiff will not eliminate the obligation to pay the filing fee. McGore, 114 F.3d at 607; see also In re Alea, 286 F.3d 378, 381 (6th Cir. 2002). --------
s/ James D. Todd
JAMES D. TODD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE