Doss v. Department of Corrections et al

Filing 5

INITIAL REVIEW ORDER granting 4 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Kenneth L. Doss. The Plaintiffs Complaint shall proceed past initial review without prepayment of the initial filing fee. The Clerk of Court shall deliver a copy of this Order to the Fort Dodge Correctional Facility care of the Plaintiff. The Clerk of Court shall also deliver, by certified mail,copies of this Order and attached waiver of service of summons, along with copies of the Complaint to each of the named Defendants, and to the Iowa Attorney General. The Court grants 3 MOTION to Appoint Counsel. The Court hereby appoints an attorney Hannah Vellinga. Appointed counsel will have 30 days to help Mr. Doss file a correct prisoner account stateme nt. The Clerk of Court will assess the appropriate filing fee upon receipt of the inmate account. The filing fee must be paid within 30 days from the assessment. Appointed counsel will have 45 days to file an amended complaint as set out above. Signed by Senior Judge Donald E OBrien on 1/30/15. (copy w/nef mailed to plaintiff; copy w/complaint mailed via certified mail to Warden, Iowa Attorney General, and defendants). (djs)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
CENTRAL DIVISION
KENNETH L. DOSS,
Plaintiff,

No. 14-CV-3084-DEO

v.

INITIAL REVIEW ORDER

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
JAMES MCKINNEY, JANA HACKER,
KAREN ANDERSON, RENEE
SNEITZER, and NIKKI
WHITACRE.
Defendants.
____________________
I.

INTRODUCTION
This

matter

Doss’(hereinafter
Complaint.1

In

is
Mr.
his

before
Doss)

the
pro

Complaint,

se

Mr.

Court
42
Doss

on

Kenneth

U.S.C.

§

alleges

various

constitutional deprivations committed by the Defendants.

1

1983

Mr.

In his original Complaint, Mr. Doss requested that he
be appointed counsel and be allowed to proceed without the
prepaying of filing fees. However, Mr. Doss’ request did not
comply with applicable rules. The Clerk of Court’s Office
sent Mr. Doss a proper in forma pauperis form and gave him
thirty days to return it to the Clerk’s Office. See Docket
No. 2. On January 6, 2015, Mr. Doss filed an application to
appoint counsel. Docket No. 3. On January 8, 2015, Mr. Doss
filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis.

Doss is currently an inmate in at the Fort Dodge Correctional
Facility.
II.

HISTORY
As noted above, Mr. Doss is an inmate at the Fort Dodge

Correctional Facility.

In 2007, Mr. Doss pled guilty to

lascivious acts with a child.
(Iowa Ct. App. 2009).
and

sentenced

Mr.

Doss v. State, 772 N.W.2d 270

The Iowa District Court imposed a fine
Doss

to

an

indeterminate

term

of

incarceration not to exceed ten years, but suspended the
sentence.

Later that year, the Iowa District Court

Id.

revoked Mr. Doss’ probation, and imposed the suspended prison
sentence.

Id.

Since being confined on those state court

charges, Mr. Doss has filed a number of cases in Federal
Court.
Mr.

Doss

filed

a

42

U.S.C.

Section

1983

complaint,

11-CV-475-JAJ, in the Southern District of Iowa in 2011.

The

case was assigned to Judge John Jarvey and was dismissed on
January 11, 2012.

In that case, Mr. Doss contended that

Department of Corrections’ policy prevented him from entering
the

SOTP

(sexual

offender

treatment

program)

during

the

pendency of his criminal appeal, because the program requires
2

that he “state what the victim stated in open court, however
the victim did not testify in open court.”

He alleged that

after a hearing on February 1, 2011, a decision was reached to
continue suspension of his right to earn good time and that he
was told that his “right to self incrimination was not an
acceptable reason to not take treatment.”

Mr. Doss contended

that if he was awarded the earned time to which he is
entitled, he would be eligible for release.

Mr. Doss sought

damages for every day he spent in prison after April 13, 2009,
and an order correcting his earned good time calculations and
awarding monetary damages.

Judge Jarvey denied Mr. Doss’

claim for relief, and the denial of relief was affirmed on
appeal.

Doss v. Iowa Dep’t of Corrections, No. 12-1896 (8th

Cir. 2012).
In 2013, Mr. Doss filed another 42 U.S.C. Section 1983
case, 13-CV-0319-JAJ, in the Southern District of Iowa, which
was again assigned to Judge Jarvey.

In that case, Mr. Doss

argued that he improperly lost good time credit.

He sought

return of the earned time, release from prison, and damages.
Judge Jarvey dismissed Mr. Doss’ case pursuant to Portley-El
v. Brill, 288 F.3d 1063 (8th Cir. 2002) and Heck V. Humphrey,
3

512 U.S. 477 (1994), stating:
[s]uccess on this claim would necessarily
imply the invalidity of Doss’s confinement,
and Doss does not allege that his loss of
earned time has been set aside or otherwise
vacated. Thus, he is barred from bringing
a claim for monetary damages under § 1983
until he shows that he has successfully
challenged the loss of earned time. The
case therefore is dismissed.
13-CV-0319-JAJ, Southern District of Iowa, Docket No. 3, p. 4.
Judge Jarvey’s ruling was affirmed by the 8th Circuit Court of
Appeals.

13-CV-0319-JAJ, Southern District of Iowa, Docket

No. 13, p. 1.
On April 13, 2013, Mr. Doss filed a 28 U.S.C. Section
2254 Petition, 13-CV-0188-REL, in the Southern District of
Iowa, which was assigned to Judge Ronald Longstaff. On August
18, 2014, Judge Longstaff entered a ruling setting out that
Mr. Doss had exhausted his state court remedies but that his
case must be dismissed on statute of limitations grounds.
13-CV-0188-REL, Southern District of Iowa, Docket No. 32.
Judge Longstaff’s ruling was affirmed by the 8th Circuit Court
of Appeals. 13-CV-0188-REL, Southern District of Iowa, Docket
No. 39.

4

On June 9, 2014, Mr. Doss filed case 14-CV-0222-REL, in
the Southern District of Iowa. That case was also assigned to
Judge Longstaff.

In that case, Mr. Doss again raised issues

related to good time credit. Mr. Doss further alleged that he
was assaulted by other inmates, improperly implicated in a
relationship with a jailer, and had his legal correspondence
opened.

Judge Longstaff dismissed Mr. Doss’ claim related to

good time credits on res judicata grounds and ordered Mr. Doss
to file a more definite statement related to the other claims
so Judge Longstaff could properly determine whether those
claims are venued in the Northern or Southern District of
Iowa.

See 14-CV-0222-REL, Southern District of Iowa, Docket

No.’s 14 and 16.
pending.

As of this date, 14-CV-0222-REL is still

Id.

On November 11, 2014, Mr. Doss filed another 28 U.S.C.
Section 2254 Petition, 14-CV-0445-RP, in the Southern District
of Iowa.

That case has been assigned to Judge Robert Pratt

and is currently pending.
On December 23, 2014, Mr. Doss filed another pro se
Complaint, 14-CV-0511-REL, in the Southern District of Iowa.

5

The pro se filing in 14-CV-0511-REL has been terminated, and
the filing has been referred to case 14-CV-0222-REL.
III.

IN FORMA PAUPERIS
The filing fee for a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action is $350.00.

28 U.S.C. § 1914(a).

In forma pauperis status allows a

plaintiff to proceed without incurring filing fees or other
court costs.

In order to qualify for in forma pauperis

status, a plaintiff must provide this Court an affidavit2 with
the following statements:

(1) statement of the nature of the

action, (2) statement that plaintiff is entitled to redress,
(3) statement of the assets plaintiff possesses, and (4)
statement that plaintiff is unable to pay filing fees and
court

costs

1915(a)(1).3
requirement:

or

give

security

Prisoners

must

therefor.
also

meet

28
an

U.S.C.

§

additional

they must submit a certified copy of their

2

An affidavit is a “voluntary declaration of facts
written down and sworn to by the declarant before an officer
authorized to administer oaths.” Black’s Law Dictionary (9th
ed. 2009), affidavit.
3

Entitled to redress means that the plaintiff is
entitled to relief or is entitled to a judgement in his or her
favor.
6

prisoner trust fund account statement for a 6-month period
prior to the filing of the complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2).
Mr.

Doss’

Motion

to

Proceed

in

Forma

Pauperis

substantially complies with the requirements laid out above
except that he has failed to include a prisoner trust account
statement.4 Accordingly, the Court will allow Mr. Doss’ claim
to proceed with out the prepayment of filing fees.

Although

the court deems it appropriate to grant the plaintiff in forma
pauperis status, the plaintiff is required to pay the full
$350.00 filing fee by making payments on an installment basis.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1); see also In re Tyler, 110 F.3d 528,
529–30 (8th Cir. 1997) (“[T]he [Prisoner Litigation Reform
Act] makes prisoners responsible for their filing fees the
moment

the

appeal.”).

prisoner

brings

a

civil

action

or

files

an

The full filing fee will be collected even if the

court dismisses the case because it is frivolous or malicious,
fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or
seeks money damages against a defendant who is immune from
such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

4

In his Motion, Mr. Doss states he has having a problem
getting a prisoner account.
7

Here, the plaintiff must pay an initial partial filing
fee in the amount of 20 percent of the greater of his average
monthly account balance or average monthly deposits for the
six months preceding the filing of the complaint.

28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(b)(1).
Because Mr. Doss has failed to file an prisoner account,
the Court cannot calculate the amount of his initial fee at
this time. As will be discussed below, the Court is persuaded
that Mr. Doss should be appointed counsel. Within thirty days
of the date of this Order, appointed counsel shall assist Mr.
Doss in obtaining the prisoner trust account information to be
submitted for assessment of the appropriate initial partial
filing fee.5

The initial partial filing fee must be payed

within thirty days from the date of the assessment.

Id.

If

the Court does not receive payment by this deadline, the
instant action shall be dismissed.
(permitting

dismissal

where

a

See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b)

plaintiff

either

fails

to

prosecute or fails to respond to an order of the court);

5

The Court notes that prisoner trust account information
is routinely given to prisoners seeking to file suit.
Consequently, the Court does not expect that obtaining the
information shall be difficult.
8

Hutchins v. A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc., 116 F.3d 1256, 1259–60
(8th Cir. 1997) (explaining court's power to dismiss an
action); Edgington v. Missouri Dept. of Corrections, 52 F.3d
777, 779–80 (8th Cir. 1995) (same), abrogated on other grounds
by Doe v. Cassel, 403 F.3d 986, 989 (8th Cir. 2005).

If

necessary, the plaintiff may request in a written motion an
extension of time to pay the initial partial filing fee.
In

addition

to

the

initial

partial

filing

fee,

the

plaintiff must “make monthly payments of 20 percent of the
preceding month's income credited to the prisoner's account.”
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

The statute places the burden on the

prisoner's

to

institution

collect

the

payments and forward them to the Court.

additional

monthly

Specifically,

[a]fter payment of the initial partial
filing fee, the prisoner shall be required
to make monthly payments of 20 percent of
the preceding month's income credited to
the prisoner's account. The agency having
custody of the prisoner shall forward
payments from the prisoner's account to the
clerk of the court each time the amount in
the account exceeds $10 until the filing
fees are paid.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

Therefore, after the plaintiff

pays in full the initial partial filing fee, the remaining

9

installments shall be collected by the institution having
custody of the plaintiff.

Id.

The Clerk's Office shall send

a copy of this Order and the Notice of Collection of the
Filing Fee to the appropriate official at the place where the
plaintiff is an inmate. Therefore, Plaintiff’s Pro Se Motion
for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis is granted.

The

Plaintiff’s Complaint (filed at Docket No. 1) shall proceed
past initial review without prepayment of the initial filing
fee.

The Clerk of Court shall deliver a copy of this Order to

the Fort Dodge Correctional Facility care of the Plaintiff.
The Clerk of Court shall also deliver, by certified mail,
copies

of

this

Order

and

attached

waiver

of

service

of

summons, along with copies of the Complaint (Docket No. 1), to
each

of

the

named

Defendants,

and

to

the

Iowa

Attorney

General. The Defendants shall have (60) days from the date of
the amended complaint to answer the amended complaint, and the
Plaintiff shall have (21) days to respond after the filing of
the Defendants’ answer(s). Upon receipt of the inmate account
information, the Clerk of Court shall assess any applicable
fees to the Plaintiff in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b).
10

However, once any portion of a filing fee is waived, a
court must dismiss the case if a Plaintiff’s allegations of
poverty prove untrue or the action in question turns out to be
frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief
may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant
who is immune from such relief.
IV.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

42 U.S.C. § 1983 INITIAL REVIEW STANDARD
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires “a short

and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is
entitled

to

relief.”

Pro

se

complaints,

no

matter

how

“inartfully pleaded are held to less stringent standards than
formal pleadings as drafted by a lawyer.” Hughes v. Rowe, 449
U.S. 5, 9 (1980) (internal citations omitted).
Although it is a long-standing maxim that a complaint’s
factual allegations are to be accepted as true at the early
stages of a proceeding, this does not require that a court
must entertain any complaint no matter how implausible.

The

facts pled “must [still] be enough to raise a right to relief
above the speculative level . . . .”
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007).

Bell Atlantic Corp. v.

In other words, the claim

to relief must be “plausible on its face.”
11

Id. at 570.

A

claim is only plausible if a plaintiff pleads “factual content
that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that
the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Ashcroft
v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009).

Where the complaint

does “not permit the court to infer more than the mere
possibility of misconduct, the complaint has alleged-but it
has not ‘show[n]’ - that the pleader is entitled to relief.”
Id. at 1950 (citing Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 8(a)(2)).

In

addition, “the tenet that a court must accept as true all of
the allegations contained in a complaint is inapplicable to
legal conclusions.”

Id. at 1949.

42 U.S.C. § 1983 provides:
Every person who, under color of any
statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or
usage, of any State or Territory or the
District of Columbia, subjects, or causes
to be subjected, any citizen of the United
States
or
other
person
within
the
jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of
any rights, privileges, or immunities
secured by the Constitution and laws, shall
be liable to the party injured in an action
at law, suit in equity, or other proper
proceeding for redress . . . .
V.

ISSUE
In his Complaint, Mr. Doss makes multiple allegations.

First, he alleges that the prison officials have refused to
12

provide medical aid, including when Mr. Doss broke his hand.
Additionally, Mr. Doss states that prison officials have
tampered with his mail and engaged in retaliation when he
complained.
VI.

ANALYSIS
A.

Deliberate Indifference

In his Complaint, Docket No. 1, Mr. Doss alleges that the
Defendants have refused to treat his broken hand, and ongoing
back and shoulder pain.
As the Courts have repeatedly stated:
[t]he Eighth Amendment prohibits the
infliction of cruel and unusual punishment.
”[T]he treatment a prisoner receives in
prison and the conditions under which he is
confined are subject to scrutiny under the
Eighth Amendment.”
Helling v. McKinney,
509 U.S. 25, 31 (1993). To prevail on an
Eighth Amendment claim for deprivation of
medical care, an inmate must show that the
prison
official
was
deliberately
indifferent to the inmate's serious medical
needs. Coleman v. Rahija, 114 F.3d 778,
784 (8th Cir. 1997).
This requires a
two-part showing that (1) the inmate
suffered from an objectively serious
medical need, and (2) the prison official
knew
of
the
need
yet
deliberately
disregarded it. Id.; see also Farmer v.
Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994); Estelle
v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 105 (1976).
A
serious medical need is “one that has been
diagnosed by a physician as requiring
treatment, or one that is so obvious that
even a layperson would easily recognize the
13

necessity for a doctor's attention.”
Camberos v. Branstad, 73 F.3d 174, 176 (8th
Cir. 1995). A medical need that would be
obvious to a layperson makes verifying
medical evidence unnecessary. Hartsfield
v. Colburn, 371 F.3d 454, 457 (8th Cir.
2004).
Schaub v. VonWald, 638 F.3d 905, 914 (8th Cir. 2011).
Mr. Doss’ pro se Complaint amounts to an allegation that
the Defendants have been deliberately indifferent.

Accepting

Mr. Doss’ allegations as true, it is clear he has alleged a
violation that may be actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

His

claim will be allowed to proceed past the initial review
stage, except as discussed below.
The Court notes that Mr. Doss’ collected pro se filings
are quite vague.

As will be discussed more below, the Court

is going to appoint Mr. Doss counsel.

Appointed counsel will

need to review Mr. Doss’ pending and past cases in the
Southern District of Iowa, Mr. Doss’ current filings, and
confer with Mr. Doss to determine which allegations are
legally

viable

and

set

those

claims

out

in

an

Amended

Complaint.
B.

Other Issues

In his filings, Mr. Doss alleges other issues, including
that the Defendants have retaliated against him for filing

14

grievances and improperly interfered with his mail. Appointed
counsel shall evaluate those claims and include them in the
Amended Complaint if warranted.
C.

Good Time Credit Loss

In his pro se filings, Mr. Doss also raises issues
related to his loss of good time credit.

As stated above, the

Federal Courts in the Southern District have already litigated
that issue and ruled against Mr. Doss. Accordingly, Mr. Doss’
allegations related to the loss of good time credits issue are
barred by the doctrine of res judicata.

To the extent Mr.

Doss argues that he has lost good time credit, those claims
are dismissed.
D.

State of Iowa

In

his

Complaint,

Mr.

Corrections as a Defendant.

Doss

named

the

Department

of

42 U.S.C. § 1983 specifically

provides for a federal cause of action against a "person" who,
under color of state law, violates another's federal rights.
In Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police, the Supreme Court
ruled "that a State is not a person within the meaning of §
1983."

491 U.S. 58, 63 (1989).

Therefore, Mr. Doss' § 1983

Complaint cannot proceed against the Department of Corrections
which is a state agency, and the State is not a "person" under

15

the law.

Accordingly, the Department of Corrections must be

dismissed from this case.
VII.

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
Mr. Doss filed an application to appoint counsel. Docket

No. 3.

Under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(1) "[t]he court may request

an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel."
As

discussed

above,

the

Court

is

granting

Mr.

Doss’

application to proceed in forma pauperis. It is clear that he
does not have the funds to afford counsel.

Accordingly, the

Court will grant Mr. Doss’ Motion to Appoint Counsel, Docket
No. 3.

The Court hereby appoints an attorney Hannah Vellinga

under Library Fund Administrative Order No. 14-AO-0007.
Appointed Counsel will have 30 days from the date of this
Order to properly submit an inmate account for the assessment
of a initial partial filing fee, and 45 days from the date of
this Order to file an amended complaint setting out Mr. Doss’
legally viable claims.
VIII.

CONCLUSION

Plaintiff’s pro se Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma
Pauperis,

Docket

No.4,

is

granted.

Plaintiff’s

pro

se

Complaint (filed at Docket No. 1) is allowed to proceed past
the

initial

review

stage.

However,
16

the

Department

of

Corrections must be dismissed as a Defendant.

Additionally,

any claims related to the loss of good time credits are barred
by the doctrine of res judicata and are dismissed.
The Court is persuaded that counsel should be appointed
to represent Mr. Doss in this case, and his motion for counsel
at Docket No. 3 is granted.

The Court hereby appoints an

attorney Hannah Vellinga under Library Fund Administrative
Order No. 14-AO-0007. Appointed counsel will have thirty days
to help Mr. Doss file a correct prisoner account statement.
The Clerk of Court will assess the appropriate filing fee upon
receipt of the inmate account.

The filing fee must be paid

within 30 days from the assessment.

Appointed counsel will

have 45 days to file an amended complaint as set out above.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 30th day of January, 2015.
__________________________________
Donald E. O’Brien, Senior Judge
United States District Court
Northern District of Iowa

17

NOTICE OF LAWSUIT
and REQUEST FOR
WAIVER OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS
TO THE NAMED DEFENDANT(S) IN THE FOLLOWING CAPTIONED ACTION:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
CENTRAL DIVISION
KENNETH L. DOSS,
Plaintiff,

No. 14-CV-3084-DEO

v.
JAMES MCKINNEY, JANA HACKER,
KAREN ANDERSON, RENEE SNEITZER,
AND NIKKI WHITACRE,
Defendants.
____________________
A lawsuit has been commenced against you (or the entity on whose behalf you are addressed). A
copy of the complaint and a copy of the corresponding order from this Court are attached. This complaint
has been filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa.
Pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, you have an obligation to cooperate
in saving unnecessary costs of service of summons and complaint. Please sign the enclosed document
where appropriate acknowledging receipt of the complaint and notice of this pending lawsuit and waiving
formal service of summons. After signing the enclosed document, please return it to the United States
.
Clerk’s Office in the envelope provided within thirty (30) days of this date: 1/30/15
I affirm that this notice and request for waiver of service of summons is being sent to you on behalf
, 2015.
of the plaintiff, this January 30
/s/ djs, Deputy Clerk

Signature (Clerk’s Office Official)
Northern District of Iowa

18

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF
NOTICE OF LAWSUIT,
and WAIVER OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS
1/30/15
(**Return this document within thirty days after ______________________________, to the United States
Clerk’s Office in the envelope provided.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
CENTRAL DIVISION
KENNETH L. DOSS,
Plaintiff,

No. 14-CV-3084-DEO

v.
JAMES MCKINNEY, JANA HACKER,
KAREN ANDERSON, RENEE SNEITZER,
AND NIKKI WHITACRE,
Defendants.
____________________
I acknowledge receipt of the complaint and notice of the lawsuit in which I (or the entity on whose
behalf I am addressed) have been named a defendant. I have received and/or read the complaint
accompanying this document.
I agree to save the cost of service of a summons and an additional copy of the complaint by not
requiring that I (or the entity on whose behalf I am acting) be served with judicial process in the manner
provided by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. I hereby waive service of summons.
I (or the entity on whose behalf I am acting) will retain all defenses or objections to the lawsuit or
to the jurisdiction or venue of the Court except for objections based on a defect in the service of summons.
I understand that a judgment may be entered against me (or the entity on whose behalf I am acting) if an
answer or motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is not served within 60 days after
1/30/15
, (the date Notice, Waiver and corresponding documents were sent or from
the date of the filing of the Amended Complaint, whichever is later) .
Date

Signature
Printed name
As
(Title)

of
(Entity)

19

Address Form
Case Number: 14-CV-3084-DEO
To:
RE:

1/30/15
Date: _____________________

Clerk of Court
Service on Named Defendants
Below, please find the known (or likely) addresses for the following
persons/entities who have been named as defendants to this action:

Defendant:

ALL DEFENDANTS
James McKinney, Warden
Jana Hacker
Karen Anderson
Renee Sneitzer
Nikki Whitacre
c/o Fort Dodge Correctional Facility
1550 L. Street
Fort Dodge, Iowa 50501
Iowa Attorney General
Thomas J. Miller
Hoover State Office Building
1305 E. Walnut Street, 2nd Floor
Des Moines, Iowa 50319

20

TO:

WARDEN/ADMINISTRATOR
FORT DODGE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, FORT DODGE, IOWA
NOTICE OF COLLECTION OF FILING FEE
You are hereby given notice that Kenneth L. Doss, #6951533, an inmate your facility, filed the

following lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa: Kenneth L. Doss
v. James McKinney, Jana Hacker, Karen Anderson, Renee Sneitzer and Nikki Whitacre, 14-CV-3084DEO. The inmate was granted in forma pauperis status pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(b), which requires
partial payments of the $350.00 filing fee. The inmate has not yet properly completed an inmate account
information, but the Court has appointed an attorney to assist the Plaintiff in completing the accounting
within 30 days from the date of this Order. Once received, the Court will assess an initial partial filing fee,
which the inmate must pay to the clerk of Court. 28 U.S.C. §1915(b)(1).
After payment of the initial partial filing fee, the [inmate] shall be required
to make monthly payments of 20 percent of the preceding month’s income
credited to [his] account. The agency having custody of the [inmate] shall
forward payments from [his] account to the clerk of the court each time
the amount in the account exceeds $10 until the filing fees are paid.
28 U.S.C. §1915(b)(2). Therefore, you must monitor the account and send payments to the clerk of court
according to the system provided in 28 U.S.C. §1915(b)(2), that is, you will begin making monthly
payments of 20 percent of the preceding month’s income credited to the inmate’s account (only after further
notification is supplied to you upon the Court’s calculation of the initial partial filing).
At the appropriate time, please make the arrangements to have these fees deducted and sent to the
court as instructed (after your agency receives further notice upon the calculation of the appropriate fee
which will be supplied to you after appointed counsel has properly filed an inmate accounting).
/s/ djs, Deputy Clerk
___________________________________________
Robert L. Phelps, U.S. District Court Clerk
Northern District of Iowa

21