Jones v. Jones et al

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. The plaintiff's motion to proceed without prepayment of fees is denied and this case is dismissed without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee. Signed by U.S. District Senior Judge Sam A. Crow on 9/14/2012.Mailed to pro se party: Ms. Chaya Jones, 1938 N. 46th Street, Kansas City, KS 66102 by certified mail; Certified Tracking Number: 70111570000262656164 and by regular mail. (bmw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF KANSAS
CHAYA JONES,
Plaintiff,
Vs.

No. 12-4111-SAC

NAOMI JONES, STATE POLICE,
RANIBOW MENTAL HEALTH FACILITY,
OSAWATOMIE POLICE DEPARTMENT,
KU POLICE DEPARTMENT, PROVIDENCE
POLICE DEPARTMENT, (fku) LYNCH, and
BARACK OBAMA, President of the United
States of America,
Defendants.
ORDER
The pro se plaintiff, Chaya Jones, filed a civil complaint form in
which most of the spaces have been left blank. (Dk. 1). Most importantly,
the plaintiff’s complaint offers no allegations as to jurisdiction, statement of
claim, or prayer for relief. Id. The plaintiff has signed and filed a motion to
proceed without prepayment of fees and an affidavit of financial status. (Dk.
3). Like her complaint, the plaintiff has not completed most of the blanks on
these pleading forms.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), a district court “may authorize
the commencement . . . of any suit [or] action . . . without prepayment of
fees . . ., by a person who submits an affidavit that includes a statement of
all assets . . . that the person is unable to pay such fees . . . . Such affidavit

shall state the nature of the action, defense or appeal and affiant’s belief
that the person is entitled to redress.” “Notwithstanding any filing fee, . . .,
the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that--. . . the action . . . is frivolous or malicious; [or] . . . fails to state a claim on
which relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). “Thus, in order to
succeed on a motion to proceed IFP, the movant must show a financial
inability to pay the required filing fees, as well as the existence of a
reasoned, nonfrivolous argument on the law and facts in support of the
issues raised in the action.” Lister v. Department of Treasury¸408 F.3d
1309, 1312 (10th Cir. 2005) (citation omitted).
Despite having and using the court’s pleading forms, the plaintiff
makes no reasonable attempt at completing them or at providing the most
basic and necessary information for an IFP determination. In the exercise of
its discretion, the court denies the plaintiff’s motion to proceed without
prepayment of fees, as she has failed to provide the requisite information.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the plaintiff’s motion to proceed
without prepayment of fees is denied and this case is dismissed without
prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee.
Dated this 14th day of September, 2012, Topeka, Kansas.

s/ Sam A. Crow
Sam A. Crow, U.S. District Senior Judge

2