Opinion
No. 04 C 3771.
June 10, 2004
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Enrique Pardo ("Pardo") has submitted a 42 U.S.C. § $1983 ("Section 1983") Complaint against seven Illinois Department of Corrections people, using the form Complaint provided by this District Court's Clerk's Office for use by prisoners. In an effort to obtain in forma pauperis status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 ("Section 1915"), Pardo has accompanied his Complaint with a Clerk-provided form of In Forma Pauperis Application ("Application") and a six-month printout reflecting transactions in Pardo's inmate trust fund account at Lawrence Correctional Center, where he is now in custody (see Section 1915(a)(2)).
But Pardo's problem in that respect is that at all times during the relevant six-month period the balance in his account has fluctuated between a high of $485.66 and a low of $306.83, with an end balance of $334.49 remaining in the account. That of course is more than ample to enable Pardo to pay the $150 filing fee. Accordingly the Application is denied, and Pardo is ordered to pay the fee on or before June 21, 2004, failing which the Complaint and this action will be dismissed for nonpayment.
Pardo has fallen short in another respect. Although this District Court's Rules and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure combine to require the submission of an original and a judge's copy of every pleading, in addition to which copies must be provided for service on each defendant if officers of the court are to serve process (see Section 1915(d), applicable in the in forma pauperis situation), Pardo has provided only the original and seven counterparts of his bulky Complaint. This Court has retained the original and the judge's copy in anticipation of Pardo's payment of the filing fee, but the other six copies are being returned to Pardo with a copy of this memorandum order so that he may prepare the one necessary extra copy and arrange for service on the defendants.
In that last respect, a photocopy of Fed.R.Civ.P. ("Rule") 4 is enclosed for Pardo with a copy of this memorandum order. Pardo's attention is called particularly to the provision of Rule 4(c)(2) that allows service to be effected by any non-party who is at least 18 years of age and to the alternative possibility of seeking a waiver of service in accordance with Rule 4(d).
On that last score, Pardo is also being furnished copies of the form used for Rule 4(d) requests for waiver of service if he chooses that route, and Pardo's attention is further called to the provisions of Rule 4(m) as to the time limit for service (which may come into play if a request for waiver is made but a defendant does not then timely return a waiver, in which even personal service becomes necessary).