Bowman et al v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al

Filing 4

ORDER ENTERED: Plaintiff Mikeal Glenn Stine is dismissed from the instant complaint. The clerk's office is to create a separate case with Mikeal Glenn Stine as the sole plaintiff, using copies of this order and the pleadings filed in the instan t action. Each plaintiff in the two separate cases is granted twenty (20) days to pay the $350.00 filing fee in their separate case, or to submit a form motion for seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. 1915. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 5/10/2011. (Mailed to pro se parties Christopher Wayne Bowman and Mikeal Glenn Stine by regular mail.) (smnd)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS CHRISTOPHER WAYNE BOWMAN and MIKEAL GLENN STINE Plaintiffs, v. CASE NO.11-3047-SAC FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, et al., Defendants. O R D E R This matter comes before the court on a pro se complaint submitted by two prisoners incarcerated in a federal penitentiary in Florence, Colorado, naming the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and BOP Regional Director Michael K. Nalley as defendants. plaintiffs signed the complaint as supplemented. Both The $350.00 district court filing fee has not been paid, and neither plaintiff has submitted a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis without prepayment of that filing fee. A prisoner seeking relief in any civil action submitted to the federal court must pay the full district court filing fee. U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). 28 The circuit courts are split on the impact of this statutory requirement when a case involves multiple prisoner plaintiffs, and this remains an open question in this circuit. Woodruff v. Wyoming, 49 Fed.Appx 199, 202 n.1 See (10th Cir.2002)(unpublished)(recognizing circuit disagreement and citing cases). This court has held that multiple prisoner plaintiffs are each responsible for paying the full district court filing fee, and must proceed in separate actions. See Hershberger v. Evercom, Inc., Case No. 07-3152-SAC, 2008 WL 45693 (D.Kan., Jan. 2, 2008)(unpublished); Horton v. Evercom, Inc., Case No. 07-3183-SAC, 2008 WL 45738 (D.Kan., Jan. 2, 2008)(unpublished). The court thus directs the clerk’s office to dismiss Mikeal Glenn Stine as a plaintiff in the present action, and to create a new case with Mikeal Glenn Stine as the sole plaintiff using copies of this order and the pleadings filed thus far in the instant record. Unless any plaintiff elects to file a notice of voluntary dismissal in his separate case, each plaintiff is granted twenty (20) days to pay the $350.00 filing fee or to submit an executed and properly supported form motion for seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.1 The failure to do so in a timely manner may result in the dismissal of that case without prejudice, and without further prior notice to the plaintiff in that action. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the plaintiff Mikeal Glenn Stine is dismissed from the instant complaint, and that the clerk’s office is to create a separate case with Mikeal Glenn Stine as the sole plaintiff, using copies of this order and the pleadings filed in the instant action. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that each plaintiff in the two separate cases is granted twenty (20) days to pay the $350.00 filing fee in 1 See D.Kan. Rule 9.1(g)(court form to be used by prisoner seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis). See also 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2)(a prisoner must also submit a certified copy of his or her institutional account for the six months immediately preceding the filing of the action, from an appropriate official from each prison in which the inmate is or was incarcerated). 2 their separate case, or to submit a form motion for seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The clerk’s office is to provide each plaintiff with a form motion for filing under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: This 10th day of May 2011 at Topeka, Kansas. s/ Sam A. Crow SAM A. CROW U.S. Senior District Judge 3

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?