Thurman v. Hardy et al
Filing
3
WRITTEN Opinion entered by the Honorable Marvin E. Aspen on 8/4/2011: The plaintiff is granted thirty days in which either to file an in forma pauperis application on the enclosed form with the information required by 28 U.S.C.§ 1915(a)(2) or pa y the full $350 filing fee. The clerk is directed to send the plaintiff an i.f.p. application along with a copy of this order. Failure of the plaintiff to comply within thirty days of the date of this order will result in summary dismissal of this case. The plaintiff is advised that hemust provide the court with the original plus a judge's copy of every document filed. [For further details see written opinion.] Mailed notice(hp, )
Order Form (01/2005)
United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois
Name of Assigned Judge
or Magistrate Judge
Marvin E. Aspen
CASE NUMBER
11 C 5246
CASE
TITLE
Sitting Judge if Other
than Assigned Judge
DATE
August 4, 2011
David Thurman (B36829) v. Marcus Hardy
DOCKET ENTRY TEXT:
The plaintiff is granted thirty days in which either to file an in forma pauperis application on the enclosed form
with the information required by 28 U.S.C.§ 1915(a)(2) or pay the full $350 filing fee. The clerk is directed to
send the plaintiff an i.f.p. application along with a copy of this order. Failure of the plaintiff to comply within
thirty days of the date of this order will result in summary dismissal of this case. The plaintiff is advised that he
must provide the court with the original plus a judge’s copy of every document filed.
O [For further details see text below.]
Docketing to mail notices.
STATEMENT
The plaintiff, a state prisoner, has submitted a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 but
has failed either to pay the statutory filing fee or to file a petition for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The
Prison Litigation Reform Act requires all inmates to pay the full filing fee, even those whose cases are summarily
dismissed. In all prisoner civil lawsuits, the court must assess an initial partial filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. §
1915(b)(1). The court will direct correctional officials to deduct the initial filing fee payment directly from the
plaintiff’s trust fund account. Thereafter, correctional authorities having custody of the plaintiff will be
authorized and ordered to make monthly payments to the court of 20% of the preceding month’s income credited
to the trust fund account until such time as the full filing fee is paid.
To enable the court to make the necessary assessment of the initial partial filing fee, the plaintiff must
“submit a certified copy of the trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the prisoner for the
6-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint or notice of appeal, obtained from the
appropriate official of each prison at which the prisoner is or was confined.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). Therefore,
if the plaintiff wishes to proceed with this case by making installment payments instead of paying the full filing
fee in advance, he must file an in forma pauperis application on the form required by the rules of this court,
(CONTINUED)
cr
Page 1 of 2
STATEMENT (continued)
together with a certified copy or copies of his trust fund statements reflecting all activity in his accounts in the past
six months [that is, from February 2, 2011, through August 2, 2011].
The plaintiff must, within thirty days, either file an in forma pauperis application on the enclosed form with
the information required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) or pay the full $350 filing fee. The clerk will furnish the
plaintiff with an in forma pauperis application along with a copy of this order. Failure of the plaintiff to comply
within thirty days of the date of this order will result in summary dismissal of this case.
The plaintiff is reminded that he must provide the court with the original plus a judge’s copy of every
document filed.
Page 2 of 2
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?