Stine v. Wiley et al

Filing 194

MINUTE ORDER denying 192 Plaintiffs Motion for Amended Court Order by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 3/23/2010.(klmcd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 06-cv-02105-WYD-KLM MIKEAL GLENN STINE, Plaintiff, v. R. WILEY / Warden, ADX, Florence, CO; JOHN T. SHARTLE /AW ADX - Florence, CO; MS. KRIST /SIA /ADX - Florence, CO Defendants. _____________________________________________________________________ MINUTE ORDER _____________________________________________________________________ ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for Amended Court Order [Docket No. 192; Filed March 19, 2010] (the "Motion"). Plaintiff requests that the Court revise his monthly filing fee payment requirements, arguing that making payments toward the filing fees for the numerous cases he filed in this Court prevents him from paying for other things, such as clothes and shoes. According to Plaintiff, he currently owes money toward the filing fee in ten cases. Monthly filing fee payments are required by the applicable provision of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). See Shabazz v. Parsons, 127 F.3d 1246 (10th Cir. 1997) (finding 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b) constitutional even where plaintiff alleged payments toward filing fee prevented him from buying "small amenities"). Requiring that Plaintiff face the economic cost of pursuing numerous civil actions is part of the purpose of the Act. See Baker v. Suthers, 9 Fed. App'x 947, 950 (10th Cir. 2001) (citations omitted) (noting that "the purpose of the Prison Litigation Reform Act is not to deny a prisoner access to the courts, but to require the prisoner to consider whether the merits of his claim are worth the cost of bringing the action"). IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED. Dated: March 23, 2010