Roehl v. Arpaio et al

Filing 27

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE the reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn only with respect to Plaintiff's Motion for a 60 Day Stop Payment 21 . All other matters in this action remain with the Magistrate Judge for disposition as appropriate. Plai ntiff's Motion for a 60 Day Stop Payment 21 is denied. Within 30 days from the date this Order is filed, Plaintiff must either pay the $149.06 balance of the $350.00 filing fee or file a Response. If Plaintiff fails to comply, the Clerk of Court must enter a judgment of dismissal without prejudice. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 10/13/11. (TLJ)

1

WO

KM

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Corey Demetries Roehl,
Plaintiff,

10
11

vs.

12
Joseph M. Arpaio, et al.,
13
Defendants.
14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV 10-2424-PHX-GMS (LOA)
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

15
16

Plaintiff Corey Demetries Roehl, who was formerly confined in the Arizona State

17

Prison-Phoenix, has filed a pro se Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff was

18

granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis and assessed the statutory filing fee of 350.00.

19

(Doc. 5). On September 12, 2011, Plaintiff filed a “Motion for a 60 Day Stop Payment” in

20

which he notified the Court that he has been released and requests a 60-day “hold” on his

21

filing fee payments. Plaintiff was cautioned that in the event of his release, he would be

22

required to pay the balance of the filing fee within 120 days or show cause why he cannot

23

pay. Currently, Plaintiff owes $149.06 towards the fee.

24
25

collection of his partial fee payments because there is no mechanism for the Court to collect

26

partial payments of the filing fee. Accordingly, the Court will deny Plaintiff’s Motion for

27

a 60 Day Stop Payment. However, Plaintiff will be given 30 days from the date this Order

28
JDDL

Because Plaintiff is no longer in custody, the Court cannot “hold” or stay the

is filed to either pay the $149.06 balance of the filing fee or file a “Response” to this Order.

1

Plaintiff’s Response must state the date of his release and must either promise to pay

2

the unpaid balance of the filing fee within 120 days from the date of his release or show

3

good cause why he cannot pay the outstanding balance of the filing fee. Plaintiff’s

4

Response must be made under penalty of perjury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1746 (oath requirement

5

may be satisfied when a person declares under penalty of perjury that the submission is true

6

and correct and signs and dates the document).

7

If Plaintiff fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, the Court may

8

dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61

9

(9th Cir. 1992) (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order

10

of the Court).

11

IT IS ORDERED:

12

(1)

The reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn only with respect to

13

Plaintiff’s Motion for a 60 Day Stop Payment (Doc. 21). All other matters in this action

14

remain with the Magistrate Judge for disposition as appropriate.

15

(2)

Plaintiff’s Motion for a 60 Day Stop Payment (Doc. 21) is denied.

16

(3)

Within 30 days from the date this Order is filed, Plaintiff must either pay the

17
18

$149.06 balance of the $350.00 filing fee OR file a Response as described above.
(4)

If Plaintiff fails to pay the balance of the filing fee or file a Response to this

19

Order within 30 days, the Clerk of Court must enter a judgment of dismissal of this action

20

without prejudice.

21

DATED this 13th day of October, 2011.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JDDL

-2-