Westine v. Jailer, Grayson County Jail

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM OPINION by Chief Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr. that because Plaintiff has failed to comply with an order of this Court, by separate Order, the Court will dismiss the instant action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). cc: Petitioner, pro se (SG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT OWENSBORO
JOHN G. WESTINE

PETITIONER

v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:15-CV-P56-JHM

JAILER, GRAYSON COUNTY JAIL

RESPONDENT

MEMORANDUM OPINION
The petitioner, John G. Westine, filed this pro se action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241
seeking a writ of habeas corpus and filed an application to proceed without prepayment of fees.
The Court denied the application to proceed without prepayment of fees because the application
revealed an average monthly deposit to the petitioner’s inmate trust account of over $71.00, i.e.,
more than 14 times the $5.00 filing fee. Thus, the Court ordered the petitioner to pay the filing
fee within 30 days of entry of that Order.
Instead of paying the filing fee as he was ordered to do, the petitioner filed a response
stating that about half of the money deposited monthly to his inmate trust account goes to paying
fees in another case and that he uses the remaining money each month for toiletries and food. He
asserted, “If this court deems it needs the $5.00 more than Westine needs for food and hygene
items then order the Jailer to deduct $5.00 from Westine’s inmate account and send it to the court
with my humble apology, okay?”
By Order entered June 15, 2015, the Court explained that it is not the Court’s duty to
collect the filing fee; it is the petitioner’s duty to pay it. The Court ordered the petitioner to pay
the $5.00 filing fee within 21 days of entry of that Order. That Order warned the petitioner that
failure to comply fully and timely would result in dismissal of this action.

More than 21 days have passed, and Plaintiff has failed to pay the filing fee. Courts have
an inherent power “acting on their own initiative, to clear their calendars of cases that have
remained dormant because of the inaction or dilatoriness of the parties seeking relief.” Link v.
Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630 (1962). Therefore, by separate Order, the Court will
dismiss the instant action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (governing involuntary dismissal).
Date:

July 14, 2015

cc:
Petitioner, pro se
4414.009

2