Young v. Oliver

Filing 3

ORDER DISMISSING CASE by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 2/2/15. (dkals, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 15-cv-00200-GPG TIMOTHY DOYLE YOUNG, Plaintiff/Applicant, v. WARDEN OLIVER, Defendant/Respondent. ORDER DISMISSING CASE Timothy Doyle Young is in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons at ADX in Florence, Colorado. Mr. Young initiated this action by filing a pleading titled, “Habeas Corpus.” Mr. Young has not used a Court-approved form to state his claims, and he has failed to submit a filing fee or in the alternative submit a request to proceed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. In Young v. United States, No. 14-cv-00073-LTB, ECF No. 24 (D. Colo. Apr. 22, 2014), the Court imposed filing restrictions against Mr. Young based on his abusive litigation in this Court and various other federal courts. The filing restrictions require Mr. Young to: 1. File a motion titled, "Motion Pursuant to Court Order Seeking Leave to File a Pro Se Action;" 2. Attach to the Motion a copy of the injunction that imposes these recommended filing restrictions; 3. Attach to the Motion a completed Court-approved prisoner complaint or habeas form and either pay the $400 filing fee for a complaint or a $5 filing fee for a habeas, or in the alternative submit a request to proceed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 on a form that is approved by this Court and applicable to the action being filed, and attach a certified inmate account statement as required; 4. Attach a list of all prisoner complaints and § 2241 actions Mr. Young currently has pending or has filed in all federal district courts; 5. Attach a notarized affidavit that certifies Mr. Young has not presented the same claims in another federal district court, that the claims are not frivolous or taken in bad faith, that the lawsuit is not interposed for any improper purpose to harass or cause unnecessary delay, and that the filling complies with this injunction, the Fed. R. Civ. P. 8, all other provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil, and the Local Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. Because Mr. Young has failed to comply with the filing restrictions imposed in Case No. 14-cv-00073-LTB, the Court will direct the Clerk of the Court to strike the pleading filed in this case and close the action. 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 Mr. Young files a notice of appeal he must pay the full $505 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 Clerk of the Court is directed to strike ECF No. 1 and close the action because Mr. Young has failed to comply with the sanction order entered in Young v. United States, No. 14-cv-00073-LTB ECF No. 15 (D. Colo. Apr. 22, 2014). It is 2 FURTHER ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied. DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 2nd day of February , 2015. BY THE COURT: s/Lewis T. Babcock LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge United States District Court 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?