Gerwald v. Dimass Charities et al

Filing 5

ORDER denying 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; denying 3 Motion to Suit BOP. Signed by Magistrate Judge G. R. Smith on 6/9/2014. (loh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
ANAISSA B. GERWALD,
Plaintiff,
Case No. CV414-079

V.

DIMASS CHARITIES;
KATINA WHEELER;
COMMUNITY CENTER
MANAGEMENT, a/k/a
BUREAU OF PRISONS,
Defendants.

Anaissa Beth Gerwald, proceeding pro Se, is back with another
largely indecipherable, scatter-shot lawsuit. Doc. 1 (asking the Court to
"open a new complaint -- motion 1982/83/ 1985-2441 while petitioner was
in jail for unjustified violation & denial of 2nd Chance Act law -- Fraud,
Theft, False Accused. . . ."). She also moves for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis (IFP). Doc. 2. While she represents that she has been granted
IFP in the past and is "incarcerated at this time," id. at 1, she has failed to
furnish any details concerning her financial circumstances.

Accordingly, her present IFP motion (doe. 2) is DENIED, but she
may re-apply for IFP status using the standard IFP form within 14 days of
the date this Order is served. The Clerk is DIRECTED to include a
blank IFP form with the service copy of this Order.
Her "Motion to Suit the BOP" (doe. 3; she seeks an Order
terminating her probation) is DENIED without prejudice to her right to
refile it as a separate action.

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 18 (she cannot intermix

separate subject-matter claims against disparate defendants);

In re

Nintendo Co., Ltd., 544 F. App'x 934, 938 (Fed. Cir. 2013); Lester v. San
Francisco Sheriff Dep't, 2013 WL 6326152 at * 1 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2013)
("multiple claims against a single party are fine, but Claim A against
Defendant 1 should not be joined with unrelated Claim B against
Defendant 2.") (quotes and cite omitted).
SO ORDERED this 9i''day of June, 2014.

UNITED TA'TES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTHEkN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA