POWELL v. OWENS et al

Filing 6

ORDER denying 2 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; granting 3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff is Ordered to pay an initial partial filing fee of $1.51 within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this Order. There shall be no service of process until further order. Ordered by US Magistrate Judge STEPHEN HYLES on 3-17-14 (mpm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION
WILLIAM H. POWELL,
Plaintiff,
v.
BRIAN OWENS, et. al.,
Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL NO. 5:14-CV-0087-MTT-MSH

ORDER
Plaintiff William H. Powell, a state prisoner currently confined at Ware State Prison
in Jackson, Georgia, has filed a pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Plaintiff also seeks leave to proceed without prepayment of the $350.00 filing fee or
security therefor pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).
Plaintiff’s Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 3) is GRANTED.
However, Plaintiff’s submissions indicate that he should be able to now pre-pay a portion
of the filing fee. Plaintiff’s prison trust account certification shows that he has had an
average monthly balance of $7.75 for the last six months. Therefore, pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1)(B), it is ORDERED that Plaintiff now pay a partial initial filing fee of
$1.51. Plaintiff will also be required to pay the remaining $348.49 of the filing fee under
the payment plan set forth 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).

The Court’s filing fee is not

refundable, regardless of the outcome of this case. Plaintiff is thus responsible for paying
the entire filing fee even if his lawsuit is dismissed prior to service.

Plaintiff shall have TWENTY-ONE DAYS (21) DAYS from the date shown on
this Order to pay the $1.51 initial partial filing fee. Failure to comply with this Order may
result in the dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint.
Plaintiff’s pending Motion for Appointment of Counsel (ECF No. 2) is DENIED as
premature. Plaintiff’s need for counsel cannot be properly evaluated until responsive
pleadings have been filed. However, if it later becomes apparent that counsel should be
appointed in this case, after due consideration of the complexity of the issues raised or their
novelty, Poole v. Lambert, 819 F.2d 1025 (11th Cir. 1987), the Court will entertain a
renewed motion. Until then, Plaintiff’s request for court-appointed counsel is DENIED.
There shall be no service of process in this case until further order. Once Plaintiff
has paid the filing fee, the undersigned will conduct a preliminary review of his Complaint
as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
SO ORDERED, this 17th day of March, 2014.
/s/ Stephen Hyles
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2