HURT v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
ENTRY Directing Further Proceedings-The Plaintiff shall have through 12/22/2014 in which to (1)file a legible amended complaint and (2) either pay the $400.00 filing fee for this action or seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 11/18/2014 (dist made)(CBU)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Cause No. 1:14-cv-01846-TWP-DKL
Entry Directing Further Proceedings
The plaintiff filed a complaint on November 12, 2014 against the United States, but has
not paid the filing fee or sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Regardless of whether the
plaintiff had paid the filing fee, the Court must assess the complaint under the standard established
in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). This statute directs that the Court dismiss a complaint or any claim
within a complaint which “(1) is frivolous or malicious; (2) fails to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted; or (3) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.”
Id. The Court cannot perform this screening, however, because the complaint is illegible and the
Court cannot discern the claims the plaintiff seeks to assert or any factual allegations that serve as
the basis for any claims.
Further, the Court notes that the plaintiff has been barred from proceeding in forma
pauperis in the District Court for the District of Columbia and the United States Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit. See Hurt v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 544 F.3d 308, 311 (D.C. Cir.
2008); (“We revoke Hurt’s IFP privilege, dismiss all his appeals pending before this Court and
direct the Clerk of the Court to refuse to accept any more of Hurt’s civil appeals that are not
accompanied by the appropriate filing fees.”); Hurt v. Unit 32, No. 12-1784 (D.D.C. Nov. 19,
2012). The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia explained “we think ‘the number,
content, frequency, and disposition’ of his filings shows an especially abusive pattern, aimed at
taking advantage of the IFP privilege.” Id. at 310.
Based on the foregoing, the plaintiff shall have through December 22, 2014, in which to
(1) file a legible amended complaint and (2) either pay the $400.00 filing fee for this action or seek
leave to proceed in forma pauperis. If he seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis, as part of that
request, the plaintiff shall show cause why the filing restriction in the District of Columbia
discussed above should not be applied to his filings in this Court. Failure to proceed consistent
with these directions may result in dismissal of this action without further notice to the plaintiff.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
422 Chesapeake Street, SE
Washington, DC 20032
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?