Williams v. Hulick et al

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Directing Plaintiff to submit an updated statement of his inmate trust fund account. Signed by Judge G. Patrick Murphy on 10/04/2010. (jwt)

Williams v. Hulick et al

Doc. 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EUGENE WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, vs. DONALD HULICK, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CIVIL NO. 10-206-GPM

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
MURPHY, District Judge: This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). However, Plaintiff has not submitted a certified copy of his prison trust fund account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint as required by § 1915(a)(1). Plaintiff's complaint was filed with this Court on March 16, 2010. The account statement attached to his motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) covers the time period October 8, 2008 to March 19, 2009. In short, the attached account statement is too old and does not cover the proper time period. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall submit, within THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of the entry of this order, a certified copy of his prison trust fund account statement for the sixmonth period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint. Plaintiff is ADVISED that in the event he has been transferred among institutions during this six-month period, it is Plaintiff's responsibility to obtain a copy of his prison trust account statement from each such facility and to forward it to the Court. Plaintiff is FURTHER ADVISED that his obligation to pay the filing fee Page 1 of 2

Dockets.Justia.com

for this action was incurred at the time the action was filed; such an obligation exists regardless of whether Plaintiff is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1); see also Lucien v. Jockisch, 133 F.3d 464, 467 (7th Cir. 1998). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that upon conclusion of this thirty-day period, should Plaintiff fail to comply with this order, this action will be dismissed for failure to comply with an order of this Court. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b); see generally Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 1994). IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: 10/04/10 s/ ZA ctàÜ|v~ `âÜÑ{ç G. PATRICK MURPHY United States District Judge

Page 2 of 2