Gray v. Nebraska Department of Correctional Services et al

Filing 15

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (Filing No. 2 ) is denied. This matter is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration (Filing No. 12 ) is denied as moot. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
GRAYLIN GRAY,
Plaintiff,
v.
NEBRASKA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, et
al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

4:13CV3026

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. On September 18, 2013, the
court required Plaintiff to show cause why he is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis
(“IFP”) pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §1915(g). (Filing No. 14.) The court
determined that the following three cases were brought by Plaintiff and dismissed as
frivolous: Gray v. Grammar, No. 4:95CV3446 (D. Neb.), dismissed as frivolous on
April 18, 1996; Gray v. Smith, No. 4:95CV3405 (D. Neb.), dismissed as frivolous on
March 15, 1996; and Gray v. Grammar, No. 4:95CV3404 (D. Neb.), dismissed as
frivolous on Feb. 14, 1996. Plaintiff did not file a response to the court’s September
18, 2013, Memorandum and Order, nor has he paid the court’s $400.00 filing and
administrative fees. Accordingly,
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (Filing No.
2) is denied.
2.

This matter is dismissed without prejudice.

3.

Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration (Filing No. 12) is denied as moot.

4.
A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this
Memorandum and Order.
DATED this 5th day of November, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
Richard G. Kopf
Senior United States District Judge

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District of
Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their
Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no
responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user
to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.

2