Pipkins v. Banvelos

Filing 6

ORDER dismissing this action without prejudice, and denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 3/21/14. (dkals, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 14-cv-00377-BNB
ROBERT D. PIPKINS,
Plaintiff,
v.
MR. BANUELOS,
Defendant.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, Robert D. Pipkins, is a prisoner in the custody of the Federal Bureau of
Prisons who currently is incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary, High Security, in
Florence, Colorado. He initiated the instant action by submitting pro se a Prisoner
Complaint (ECF No. 1) and a Prisoner’s Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (ECF No. 3). The Court reviewed the documents and
determined they were deficient. Therefore, on February 11, 2014, Magistrate Judge
Boyd N. Boland entered an order (ECF No. 4) directing Mr. Pipkins to cure certain
enumerated deficiencies in the case within thirty days if he wished to pursue his claims.
The February 11 order pointed out that Mr. Pipkins failed to submit either the
$400.00 filing fee or a Prisoner’s Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915 on the proper, Court-approved form, i.e., the current form revised
October 1, 2012, with an authorization and certificate of prison official, together with a
certified copy of his trust fund account statement for the six-month period immediately

preceding this filing obtained from the appropriate prison official. The February 11 order
directed Mr. Pipkins to obtain, with the assistance of his case manager or the facility’s
legal assistant, the Court-approved form for filing a Prisoner’s Motion and Affidavit for
Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The February 11 order warned him
that if he failed to cure the designated deficiencies within thirty days, the action would
be dismissed without prejudice and without further notice.
On February 18, 2014, Mr. Pipkins submitted an uncertified copy of his trust fund
account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding this filing. He failed
to submit an amended Prisoner’s Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915 on the proper, Court-approved form. Therefore, the Prisoner
Complaint and the action will be dismissed without prejudice for Mr. Pipkins’ failure to
cure the designated deficiencies as directed within the time allowed.
Finally, the Court certifies pursuant to § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this
order would not be 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 Mr. Pipkins files a notice of appeal he also must pay the full $505.00
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 Prisoner Complaint (ECF No. 1) and the action are
dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil

2

Procedure for the failure of Plaintiff, Robert Pipkins, to cure the deficiencies designated
in the order to cure of February 11, 2014, within the time allowed. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is
denied. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that any pending motions are denied as moot.
DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 21st

day of

March

, 2014.

BY THE COURT:

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

3