NEAL v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al

Filing 9

ENTRY and NOTICE. Based on the information in Part I of this Entry, the order granting the plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis 5 is vacated. Also based on the information reviewed in Part I of this Entry, the reque st to proceed in forma pauperis 2 is denied. The plaintiff shall have through August 30, 2013, in which to pay the $350.00 filing fee and the $50.00 administrative fee, a total of $400.00, to the clerk of this court. T He plaintiff is reminded that "unpaid docket fees incurred by litigants subject to Section 1915(g) lead straight to an order forbidding further litigation." Sloan v. Lesza, 181 F.3d 857, 859 (7th Cir. 1999). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 8/12/2013. Copy mailed to plaintiff via U.S. Mail.(NMT)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
TERRE HAUTE DIVISION
ROBERT DAVID NEAL,
Plaintiff,
vs.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

2:13-cv-188-JMS-MJD

Entry and Notice
I.
A prisoner who has filed at least three suits or appeals that are frivolous, malicious, or fail
to state a claim is ineligible to proceed in forma pauperis and must prepay all fees unless in
imminent physical danger. 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(g); see Ammons v. Gerlinger, 547 F.3d 724, 725
(7th Cir. 2008). In addition, [a] litigant who knows that he has accumulated three or more
frivolous suits or appeals must alert the court to that fact.@ Id. (citing Sloan v. Lesza, 181 F.3d
857, 858-59 (7th Cir. 1999)).
The plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis was granted on July 8, 2013.
However, the plaintiff did not supply information from which it could and should have been
determined that he was and is ineligible for that status because of the barrier created by 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g) and because of his litigation history.
In Evans v. Illinois Department of Corrections, 150 F.3d 810 (7th Cir. 1998), it was noted
that a prisoner-litigant in these circumstances is entitled to know the cases the court relies on
when making the three-strikes determination. For plaintiff Neal’s reference, the cases on which
the court relies in finding three Astrikes@ are the following:

Nelson v. Briggs, No. 1:11-cv-558-JMS-MJD (S.D.Ind. July 26, 2011)(dismissed for
failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted)
Nelson v. Quintana, No. 5:10-cv-484-UA-DUTY (C.D.Calif. April 9, 2010) (dismissed
for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted)
Neal v. United States, 2013 WL 1715779 (Ct.Cl. April 19, 2013)(“Plaintiff’s complaint
may also be dismissed because it is clearly frivolous and an abuse of the judicial
system.”)
II.
A.
Based on the information reviewed in Part I of this Entry, the order granting the
plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis [dkt. 5] is vacated.
Also based on the information reviewed in Part I of this Entry, the request to proceed in
forma pauperis [dkt. 2] is denied.
B.
The plaintiff shall have through August 30, 2013, in which to pay the $350.00 filing fee
and the $50.00 administrative fee, a total of 400.00, to the clerk of the district court.
C.
The plaintiff is reminded that "unpaid docket fees incurred by litigants subject to Section
1915(g) lead straight to an order forbidding further litigation." Sloan v. Lesza, 181 F.3d 857, 859
(7th Cir. 1999).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
08/12/2013
Date: _____________

_______________________________
Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana

Distribution:
Robert David Neal, #15151-180, Terre Haute USP, P.O. Box 33, Terre Haute, IN 47808