Peterson v. Palmer et al

Filing 13

ORDER re 5 Complaint filed by Ryan Peterson. Peterson's Complaint must be dismissed pursuant to Judge Strand's Order, as affirmed by Judge Bennett. However, this Court normally allows CCUSO patients to proceed in forma pauperis without the prepaying of any filing fee. Accordingly, Mr. Peterson's Complaint is dismissed without prejudice and he is free to refile it. Signed by Senior Judge Donald E OBrien on 1/28/13. (copy w/nef mailed to pro se plaintiff and Administrator of CCUSO) (djs)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
WESTERN DIVISION
RYAN PETERSON
Plaintiff,

No. 12-CV-4071-DEO

vs.

ORDER

CHARLES PALMER, JASON SMITH,
MATT ROYSTER, BRAD WITTROCK,
ERVIN WHITEHEAD, SEAN
MORRIS, MICHAEL LOESCHER,
DAN PINGLE, TAL STEIG, AND
ZACH FROHLING.
Defendants.
____________________
I.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Peterson is a civilly committed patient at

Iowa’s Civil Commitment Unit for Sexual Offenders (“CCUSO”)
in Cherokee, Iowa.

On July 23, 2012, Mr. Peterson filed a

pro se Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), and a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint
against

defendants

alleging

that

CCUSO’s

mail

policies

violate the First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the
United States Constitution.

Mr. Peterson states in his

Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis that he receives
$96.00 a month in income.

On this same date, United States

Magistrate Judge Leonard T. Strand granted Mr. Peterson’s pro
se Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and directed the

clerk of court to file Mr. Peterson’s complaint.

Judge

Strand did not conduct an initial review of the complaint or
direct the clerk of court to effectuate service of the
complaint.

On August 17, 2012, Judge Strand directed that,

before Mr. Peterson would be permitted to proceed, he was
required to pay a partial filing fee of $19.20 no later than
August 31, 2012.

Judge Strand also directed that, if Mr.

Peterson paid the partial filing fee, CCUSO was to collect
and remit to the clerk of court 20 percent of Mr. Peterson’s
preceding monthly income until the $350.00 filing fee was
paid.
On August 22, 2012, Mr. Peterson appealed Judge Strand’s
order.

On August 22, 2012, Mr. Peterson filed an appeal to

District Court Judge Mark W. Bennett.

On August 24, 2012,

Judge Bennett affirmed the Magistrate’s Ruling.
action

was

Peterson

taken

did

not

by

the
pay

Court
the

system,

fee

as

even

No further
though

required

by

Mr.
the

aforementioned Orders.
On September 24, 2012, Mr. Peterson sent a letter to this
Court asking why his Complaint had been dismissed when other
similar Complaints are allowed to proceed in forma pauperis.
The Court styled this letter as a Motion under Rule of Civil

2

Procedure 60(b).

On October 30, 2012, Mr. Peterson’s case

was transferred to this Court.

On November 9, 2012, Mr.

Peterson filed a Motion to Appoint Council.
II.

ANALYSIS
After a review of the file, it seems clear that Mr.

Peterson’s Complaint must be Dismissed pursuant to Judge
Strand's Order, as affirmed by Judge Bennett.1

However, this

Court normally allows CCUSO patients to proceed in forma
pauperis

without

the

prepaying

of

any

filing

fee.

Accordingly, Mr. Peterson's Complaint is dismissed without
prejudice and he is free to refile it.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 28th day of January, 2013.

__________________________________
Donald E. O’Brien, Senior Judge
United States District Court
Northern District of Iowa

1

To the extent that Mr. Peterson’s letter dated September
24, 2012, is a Motion to Reconsider or Vacate under Rule 60(b)
it is denied.
3