Opinion
Civil Action No. 12-cv-01220-BNB
10-01-2012
ZuQUETE ZUMAR HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. LIEUTENANT VANMETTER, CAPTAIN LITTLE, MAJOR NYCZ, LIEUTENANT LAWSON, SERGEANT NICKELS, CASE MANAGER RYAN M. LONG, GANG COORDINATOR LITTLE, and CAPTAIN B. K. WHITNEY, Defendants.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
On June 20, 2012, Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland entered an order directing Plaintiff, ZuQuete Zumar Harris, to file an amended pleading that clarifies who he is suing and the claims he is asserting in this action. Mr. Harris was warned that the action would be dismissed without further notice if he failed to file an amended pleading within thirty days.
On July 18, 2012, Mr. Harris submitted for filing a two-page document which he titled Amended Prisoner Complaint (ECF No. 10) that consisted of only the first two pages of the court-approved Prisoner Complaint form. The Amended Prisoner Complaint did not include any claims for relief, a request for relief, or a signature page. On July 20, 2012, Magistrate Judge Boland entered a minute order advising Mr. Harris that the Amended Prisoner Complaint did not comply with the June 20 order to file an amended complaint and directing Mr. Harris to file a second amended pleading within thirty days using the entire court-approved Prisoner Complaint form.
On August 22, 2012, Mr. Harris filed a letter (ECF No. 12) in which he stated that he did not understand what he is required to do in response to the orders directing him to file an amended pleading in this action. Mr. Harris also requested either an order directing prison authorities to provide him with adequate legal assistance or appointment of counsel. On August 24, 2012, Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer entered an order explaining what Mr. Harris must do to comply with the orders directing him to file a second amended complaint, denying the request for either an order directing prison authorities to provide legal assistance or appointment of counsel, and directing Mr. Harris to file a second amended complaint within thirty days. Magistrate Judge Shaffer also directed Mr. Harris to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to make monthly filing fee payments as he had been directed to do in prior orders.
Mr. Harris has failed within the time allowed either to file a second amended complaint or to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to make monthly filing fee payments. In fact, he has not filed any papers in this action in response to Magistrate Judge Shaffer's August 24 order. Therefore, the action will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with court orders to file a second amended complaint and to make monthly filing fee payments.
Furthermore, the Court certifies pursuant to 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 will be denied for the purpose of appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962). If Plaintiff files a notice of appeal he also must pay the full $455 appellate filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit within thirty days in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 24. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the complaint and the action are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure because Mr. Harris failed to comply with court orders directing him to file a second amended complaint and to make monthly filing fee payments. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied without prejudice to the filing of a motion seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 1st day of October, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
__________________
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge
United States District Court