Opinion
2:16-cv-00734-RFB-VCF
05-23-2016
AMANDA LEA SEXTON and TONEY ANTHONEY WHITE, Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF CLARK NEVADA et al., Defendants.
ORDER
I. DISCUSSION
On April 21, 2016, this Court issued an order noting that Plaintiff Sexton had submitted an incomplete application to proceed in forma pauperis and that Plaintiff White had not submitted any application to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 2 at 1). The Court denied Plaintiff Sexton's application to proceed in forma pauperis without prejudice. (Id.). The Court directed Plaintiffs Sexton and White to either (1) individually file fully complete applications to proceed in forma pauperis or (2) pay the full $400 for filing a civil action within 30 days from the date of that order. (Id. at 2).
On May 2, 2016, Plaintiff White filed one page of the application to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 3). Plaintiff White's application to proceed in forma pauperis is incomplete. On May 9, 2016, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. (ECF No. 4). On May 13, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a motion to amend/correct complaint and a motion to receive a copy of the local rules and copies of their original complaint. (ECF No. 5, 6). In those motions, Plaintiffs stated that Plaintiff White has submitted a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis and that Plaintiff Sexton's application is "pending." (ECF No. 5 at 1). Plaintiffs also requested copies of the local rules and copies of their initial complaint for each of them. (Id.). On May 19, 2016, Plaintiff filed another application to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 7). This application is also incomplete.
The two motions are identical. (See ECF No. 5, 6).
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) and Local Rule LSR 1-2, each Plaintiff must complete an application to proceed in forma pauperis and attach both an inmate account statement for the past six months and a properly executed financial certificate. Plaintiff White has not submitted a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis, a properly executed financial certificate, or an inmate account statement. (See ECF No. 3). As such, Plaintiff White's in forma pauperis application is denied without prejudice. Plaintiff White will be granted one final opportunity to cure the deficiencies of his application to proceed in forma pauperis, or in the alternative, pay the full filing fee for this action. If Plaintiff White chooses to file a new application to proceed in forma pauperis, he must file a fully complete application to proceed in forma pauperis. If Plaintiff White files another incomplete application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court will dismiss Plaintiff White from the case in its entirety, without prejudice, to file a new case when Plaintiff White is able to acquire the necessary documents to file a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis.
The application to proceed in forma pauperis is four pages long. The financial certificate is on page 4 of the application and must be completed by the inmate and a properly authorized jail or prison official. --------
Plaintiff Sexton's application to proceed in forma pauperis is incomplete because she has not included an inmate account statement. (See ECF No. 7). The Court denies Plaintiff Sexton's application to proceed in forma pauperis without prejudice. Plaintiff Sexton will also be granted one final opportunity to cure the deficiencies of her application to proceed in forma pauperis, or in the alternative, pay the full filing fee for this action. If Plaintiff Sexton files another incomplete application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court will dismiss Plaintiff Sexton from the case in its entirety, without prejudice, to file a new case when Plaintiff Sexton is able to acquire the necessary documents to file a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis.
With respect to the motion to amend the complaint, the Court grants the motion. (ECF No. 5). However, the Court is unclear whether the amended complaint submitted on May 9, 2016 (ECF No. 4) is the operative amended complaint. If the May 9, 2016, amended complaint is the operative amended complaint, Plaintiffs must notify the Court in writing on or before Wednesday, June 22, 2016. Additionally, if Plaintiffs intend to file a second amended complaint, they must do so on or before Wednesday, June 22, 2016.
With respect to the copy of the local rules, the Court grants the motion in part. The Court directs the Clerk of the Court to send each Plaintiff Sexton and Plaintiff White a copy of the District of Nevada's Local Rules of Practice sections IA Introduction (LR IA 1-1 through LR IA 11-8) and Part V Special Proceedings and Appeals (LSR 1-1 through LSR 6-3).
The Court denies Plaintiffs' request for copies of the complaint for each of them. The Court cannot provide copies or mailing service for parties, even indigent plaintiffs proceeding in forma pauperis. If Plaintiffs wish to receive copies of electronically filed documents from the Court, the cost is $0.10 per page. See Local Rule IC 1-1(i)(5). If Plaintiffs wish to receive a file-stamped copy of any pleading or other paper, Plaintiffs must include one (1) additional copy for that purpose in their mail filing.
II. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the applications to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 3, 7) are DENIED without prejudice to file a new application.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court SHALL SEND Plaintiff White and Plaintiff Sexton each the approved form application to proceed in forma pauperis by a prisoner, as well as the document entitled information and instructions for filing an in forma pauperis application.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on or before Wednesday, June 22, 2016, Plaintiffs Sexton and White shall either: (1) individually file a fully complete application to proceed in forma pauperis, on the correct form with complete financial attachments in compliance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a); or (2) pay the full $400 fee for filing a civil action (which includes the $350 filing fee and the $50 administrative fee).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if Plaintiffs Sexton or White's next application to proceed in forma pauperis is incomplete, the Court will dismiss that plaintiff from the case, without prejudice, for that plaintiff to file a new case when she or he is able to acquire the necessary documents to file a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiffs do not timely file their applications to proceed in forma pauperis, dismissal of this action may result.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to amend/correct complaint (ECF No. 5) is granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiffs intend to file a second amended complaint, Plaintiffs shall file the second amended complaint on or before Wednesday, June 22, 2016. If Plaintiffs intend for the amended complaint submitted on May 9, 2016 (ECF No. 4) to be the operative complaint, Plaintiffs must notify the Court in writing on or before Wednesday, June 22, 2016.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for copy of local rules (ECF No. 6) is granted in part. The Clerk of the Court shall send each Plaintiff a copy of the District of Nevada's Local Rules of Practice sections IA Introduction (LR IA 1-1 through LR IA 11-8) and Part V Special Proceedings and Appeals (LSR 1-1 through LSR 6-3).
DATED: This 23rd day of May, 2016.
/s/_________
United States Magistrate Judge