Pachokas v. No Defendants Named

Filing 12

ORDER of Dismissal. ORDERED that the Complaint and action are dismissed without prejudice. Leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied. All pending motions, 7 , 8 , and 9 , are denied as moot, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 3/12/13.(sgrim)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 13-cv-00254-BNB

JAMES PACHOKAS,
Plaintiff,
v.
[NO NAMED DEFENDANTS],
Defendants.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, James Pachokas, currently is detained at the Weld County Jail in
Greeley, Colorado. Plaintiff, acting pro se, initiated this action by filing a one-page
statement challenging the conditions of his confinement. In an order entered on
February 1, 2013, Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland instructed Plaintiff to file his claims
on a Court-approved form used in filing prisoner complaints. Magistrate Judge Boland
also instructed Plaintiff to submit a Prisoner’s Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 form.
Magistrate Judge Boland warned Plaintiff that the action would be dismissed
without further notice if he failed to cure the deficiencies within thirty days. On February
6, 2013, rather than comply with the February 1 Order Plaintiff filed a Letter and stated
that he did not understand Magistrate Judge Boland’s February 1 Order. Magistrate
Judge Boland entered a Minute Order on February 6 explaining with specificity what

Plaintiff was expected to file. Subsequently, Plaintiff filed two Court-approved forms
used in requesting leave to proceed pursuant to § 1915. One of the forms is used when
filing a complaint and the other is used when filing a habeas corpus action. Plaintiff
then filed a “Motion to Challenge Const. Rights” and two additional Letters. The Motion
and the Letters are not responsive to Magistrate Judge Boland’s February 1 Order. The
February 1 Order and the February 6 Minute Order were clear about what Plaintiff was
to do to cure the deficiencies in his filings. Plaintiff, however, did not comply with either
order requiring that he file his claims on a Court-approved form. Plaintiff, therefore, has
failed to comply with the February 1 Order within the time allowed, and the action will be
dismissed.
The Court also certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from
this Order is not taken in good faith, and, therefore, in forma pauperis status will be
denied for the purpose of appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438
(1962). If Plaintiff files a notice of appeal he must pay the full $455 appellate filing fee
or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in the United States Court of Appeals for
the Tenth Circuit within thirty days in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 24.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the Complaint and action are dismissed without prejudice
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to cure all deficiencies and for failure to
prosecute. It is

2

FURTHER ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is
denied. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions are denied as moot.
DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 12th day of

March

, 2013.

BY THE COURT:

s/Lewis T. Babcock
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge
United States District Court

3