Jasper v. Kenny et al

Filing 15

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - This case is dismissed without prejudice. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this order. Plaintiff's institution must collect the monthly payments in the manner set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b) (2) and forward those payments to the court. The clerk's office is directed to send a copy of this order to the appropriate official at Plaintiff's institution. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party and to Plaintiff's institution)(GJG)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
MICHAEL JASPER,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL KENNY, Director, and
DIANA RINES, Warden,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

4:14CV3200

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff Michael Jasper’s correspondence
(Filing No. 14) dated December 16, 2014, asking the court to waive his obligation to
pay the court’s $350.00 filing fee. For the reasons discussed below, the court will
dismiss this action without prejudice and deny Plaintiff’s request for a waiver of the
filing fee.
I. BACKGROUND
On December 8, 2014, the clerk’s office docketed correspondence (Filing No.
12) from Plaintiff that stated, in relevant part: “I am requesting this case be dismissed
at this time due to the lack of funds in my account. I would like for you to put a stop
on this facility from taking any actions against my account.” In an order (Filing No.
13) dated December 9, 2014, the court advised Plaintiff that he would be responsible
for the $350.00 filing fee so long as he remains a prisoner even if the court were to
dismiss the action. Because Plaintiff indicated an unwillingness to prosecute this
action, the court gave Plaintiff 14 days to file written notice with the court indicating
his willingness to proceed with this action. Plaintiff’s response to the court’s order,
the correspondence at issue here, indicates that Plaintiff is unwilling to prosecute this
action. Plaintiff also asks the court to reconsider the question of whether he should
be forced to pay the $350.00 filing fee for this action. (See Filing No. 14.)

II. DISCUSSION
Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), an indigent inmate who
files a lawsuit in federal court must pay the $350.00 filing fee, first by making an
initial partial payment and then by sending the remainder of the fee to the court in
installments. The method for collecting the filing fee from a prisoner is specifically
provided for in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). Section 1915(b) is written in mandatory terms
(“shall”), leaving no discretion to the district court to waive an in forma pauperis
prisoner’s filing fee.
“[T]he PLRA makes prisoners responsible for their filing fees the moment the
prisoner brings a civil action or files an appeal.” In re Tyler, 110 F.3d 528, 529-30
(8th Cir. 1997); Jackson v. N.P. Dodge Realty Co., 173 F. Supp. 2d 951 (D. Neb.
2001). Moreover, prisoners remain responsible for their entire filing fees, as long as
they are prisoners, even if the case is dismissed at some later time. See In re Tyler,
110 F.3d at 529-30; Jackson, 173 F. Supp. 2d at 951.
For the foregoing reasons, the court will dismiss this action without prejudice
because Plaintiff has indicated that he is unwilling to prosecute it. However, the court
will not waive his obligation to pay the court’s $350.00 filing fee.
IT IS ORDERED:
1.
This case is dismissed without prejudice. A separate judgment will be
entered in accordance with this order.
2.
Plaintiff’s institution must collect the monthly payments in the manner
set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2) and forward those payments to the court.
3.
The clerk’s office is directed to send a copy of this order to the
appropriate official at Plaintiff’s institution.
2

DATED this 8th day of January, 2015.
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.

3