Moore v. Unknown Parties

Filing 14

ORDER Plaintiff's request in his pleading entitled "Account Verification Per Request" re 13 to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as moot. This case must remain closed. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 8/2/10. (TLJ)

Download PDF
Moore v. Unknown Parties Doc. 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WO NOT FOR PUBLICATION RP IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Larry L. Moore, Plaintiff, vs. Unknown Parties, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV 09-2595-PHX-GMS (JRI) ORDER Pending before the Court in this closed case is a pleading entitled "Account: Verification Per Request" (Doc. 13). The Court will deny the request in the pleading to proceed in forma pauperis as moot. I. Procedural Background On December 11, 2009, Plaintiff Larry L. Moore, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison Complex-Safford, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 (Doc. 1). Plaintiff did not pay the $350.00 civil action filing fee but filed a deficient Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 3). By Order filed December 22, 2009 (Doc. 4), the Court denied the Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis without prejudice and gave Plaintiff 30 days to pay the fee or file a new, completed Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and a certified six-month trust account statement from the Central Office of the Arizona Department of Corrections (ADOC). On December 31, 2009, Plaintiff filed a second Application to Proceed In Forma Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Pauperis (Doc. 5) and an "Inmate Account Statement" (Doc. 6). Although Plaintiff filed the second Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on the court-approved form, Plaintiff's Application to Proceed was deficient because the "Inmate Account Statement" filed with the Application to Proceed did not appear to have been generated by the ADOC's Central Office, as required. Indeed, it was evident that the "Inmate Account Statement" was generated by the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office. Also, the "Inmate Account Statement" did not cover the six months preceding the filing of the Complaint and had not been signed by an authorized officer of the ADOC, as required.1 Accordingly, by Order filed April 1, 2010 (Doc. 8), Plaintiff's second Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 5) was denied without prejudice and Plaintiff was granted one last chance to correct the deficiency. Plaintiff was given 30 days from the filing date of the Order to pay the $350.00 filing fee or file a completed, certified Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and a certified six-month trust account statement from the ADOC's Central Office that covered the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of the Complaint. On April 9, 2010, Plaintiff filed a new Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 9). Although Plaintiff filed the Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on the court-approved form, Plaintiff's Application to Proceed was deficient because Plaintiff had yet again failed to file a certified six-month trust account statement from the ADOC's Central Office that covered the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of the Complaint. By Order filed June 4, 2010 (Doc. 11), the Court denied Plaintiff's new Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 9) and dismissed the Complaint (Doc. 1) and this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to comply with the Court's Order filed April 1, 2010 (Doc. 8). Judgment was entered on The "Inmate Account Statement" covered the period of time from January 24, 2009, until August 11, 2009. However, Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 1) was not filed until December 11, 2009, almost five months after the date of the "Inmate Account Statement." -2- 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 June 4, 2010 (Doc. 12). II. Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis On June 15, 2010, Plaintiff filed a pleading entitled "Account: Verification Per Request" (Doc. 13). Attached to the pleading is copy of an "Inmate Letter" and a copy of a "Certified Statement Of Account." In his pleading, Plaintiff indicates that he is forwarding a copy of his "six month verification" to the Court "to proceed in forma pauperis." Because this action has been dismissed and judgment has been entered, Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis will be denied as moot. IT IS ORDERED: (1) Plaintiff's request in his pleading entitled "Account: Verification Per Request" (Doc. 13) to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as moot. (2) This case must remain closed. DATED this 2nd day of August, 2010. -3-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?