From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Minor v. Mimms

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jan 3, 2023
1:22-cv-01612-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2023)

Opinion

1:22-cv-01612-HBK (PC)

01-03-2023

ANTHONY RAY MINOR, Plaintiff, v. MARGARET MIMMS, Defendant.


ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE FULLY COMPLETED APPLICATION OR PAY FILING

TWENTY-ONE DAY DEADLINE

(DOC. NO. 2)

HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff Anthony Ray Minor initiated this action by filing a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on December 15, 2022, while detained in the Fresno County Jail. (Doc. No. 1). Plaintiff concurrently moved to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Doc. No. 2). Plaintiff's application, however, fails to comply with § 1915(a)(1)(2). Specifically, in addition to filing an affidavit of indigency, a prisoner “shall submit a certified copy of the trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the prisoner for the six-month period immediately proceeding the filing of the complaint . . . obtained from the appropriate official of each prison at which the prisoner is or was confined.” Id. Here, the “Certificate” portion of Plaintiff's IFP application is blank and was not completed and certified by an authorized official. (See Doc. No. 2 at 2).

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2) is DENIED without prejudice to Plaintiff submitting a fully completed application.
2. Within twenty-one (21) days of receipt of this order, Plaintiff shall either: (1) complete the attached application to proceed in forma pauperis in its entirety with an authorized correctional official completing the “Certificate” section of the application, or by filing a prison trust account statement reflecting the 6 months of transactions preceding the filing of the complaint; or (2) pay the $402.00 filing fee for this action.
3. Absent good cause, the Court will not grant any motions for extension of time.
4. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and/or comply with the court's orders.
5. The Clerk is directed to include a blank application to proceed in forma pauperis with this order.


Summaries of

Minor v. Mimms

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jan 3, 2023
1:22-cv-01612-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2023)
Case details for

Minor v. Mimms

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY RAY MINOR, Plaintiff, v. MARGARET MIMMS, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jan 3, 2023

Citations

1:22-cv-01612-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2023)