Opinion
Case No. 5:07cv138/MCR/EMT.
August 27, 2007
ORDER
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, initiated this action by filing a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ( see Docs. 1, 8). Now before the court is Plaintiff's "Request for Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts Pursuant to Rule 201, et. seq., Rules of Evidence" (Doc. 16), which shall be construed as a motion for reconsideration of this court's July 3, 2007 order granting Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis. This court's July 3, 2007 order provided that "the total filing fee in this case remains $350.00" and explained that "prisoners who have filed more than one case may be required to make payments totaling 40%, 60%, 80% or even 100% of their monthly deposits" (Doc. 8 at 1, n. 1).
In the instant filing, Plaintiff requests an "order to the [Bureau of Prisons] to stop garnishing Plaintiff's prison account . . . [because] the filing fees are now paid-in-full" (Doc. 16 at 4) (emphasis in original). Title 28 U.S.C § 1915(b)(1), (2) (2006) provides that "if a prisoner brings a civil action . . . in forma pauperis, the prisoner shall be required to pay the full amount of the filing fee. The court shall assess and, when funds exist, collect, as a partial payment of the court fees required by law, an initial partial filing fee of 20 percent of the greater of [the average monthly balance or deposits to the prisoner's account] . . . [and thereafter] the prisoner shall be required to make monthly payments of 20 percent of the preceding month's income credited to the prisoner's account . . . until the filing fees are paid." The court notes that on July 23, 2007 Plaintiff paid an initial partial filing fee of $9.00 ( see Docket Entry 10). Thereafter, on August 9, 2007, Plaintiff made a partial filing fee payment of $2.58 ( see Docket Entry 14). Thus, a partial filing fee balance of $338.42 remains due and owing from Plaintiff. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), (2).
Plaintiff has failed to show that the order issued July 3, 2007 was clearly erroneous or contrary to law; therefore, the motion for reconsideration shall be denied. Plaintiff is advised that he may obtain review of an order of this court on any pretrial matter by filing a motion for reconsideration with the district court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), in which he must show that this court's order was clearly erroneous or contrary to law.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff's "Request for Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts Pursuant to Rule 201, et. seq., Rules of Evidence" (Doc. 16), construed as a motion for reconsideration, is DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED.