Opinion
Civ. No. 20-5732 (NLH)
05-11-2020
FLORENCE OGANSUYI filing as next of friend for RAYMOND AIGEBKAEN, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, Respondent.
APPEARANCE: Florence Ogansuyi 705 Centerwood St. West Babylon, NY 11704 Movant Pro se Raymond Aigebkaen 94655-379 Fort Dix Federal Correctional Institution P.O. Box 2000 Joint Base MDL, NJ 08640 Petitioner Pro se
OPINION APPEARANCE: Florence Ogansuyi
705 Centerwood St.
West Babylon, NY 11704
Movant Pro se Raymond Aigebkaen
94655-379
Fort Dix Federal Correctional Institution
P.O. Box 2000
Joint Base MDL, NJ 08640
Petitioner Pro se HILLMAN, District Judge
Florence Ogansuyi seeks to bring a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 as a next friend of Raymond Aigebkaen, a prisoner at FCI Fort Dix. See ECF No. 1 (petition).
Filing Fee
The filing fee for a petition for writ of habeas corpus is $5.00. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 54.3(a), the filing fee is required to be paid at the time the petition is presented for filing. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 81.2(b), the movant must submit an affidavit setting forth information which establishes that the movant is unable to pay the fees and costs of the proceedings.
Here, Movant has failed to either include the $5 filing fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Movant must either submit the $5 filing fee or a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis for the habeas petition to be considered.
Conclusion
For the reason set forth above, the Clerk of Court will be ordered to administratively terminate this Petition without prejudice. Movant will be granted leave to apply to re-open within thirty (30) days, by paying the filing fee of $5.00 or submitting a complete in forma pauperis application. An appropriate Order will be entered. Dated: May 11, 2020
At Camden, New Jersey
Such an administrative termination is not a "dismissal" for purposes of the statute of limitations, and if the case is re-opened pursuant to the terms of the accompanying Order, it is not subject to the statute of limitations time bar if it was originally submitted timely. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988) (prisoner mailbox rule); Papotto v. Hartford Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 731 F.3d 265, 275-76 (3d Cir. 2013) (collecting cases and explaining that a District Court retains jurisdiction over, and can re-open, administratively closed cases). --------
s/ Noel L. Hillman
NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J.