Akers et al v. Keszei et al

Filing 385

ORDER Denying 381 Plaintiff's Motion to Vacate. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 5/2/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7
8
9
10
11
12

MONTGOMERY CARL AKERS,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
JAMES KESZEI, et al.,
)
)
Defendants. )
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:07-cv-00572-JCM-GWF
ORDER

13
14
15

Presently before the court is plaintiff Montgomery Carl Akers’ motion to vacate the May 2, 2012,
date to pay his filing fee. (Doc. #381).

16

Plaintiff has failed to show good cause why he should not pay the required filing fee. Plaintiff has

17

maintained this case for over five years. On April 18, 2012, this court revoked plaintiff’s in forma pauperis

18

status, and ordered plaintiff to submit the $350 filing fee by May 2, 2012. Plaintiff argues that he is

19

appealing this court’s order, and thus the date for paying the fee should be vacated. This court is not

20

persuaded. If this court’s order revoking in forma pauperis status is reversed, and plaintiff’s in forma

21

pauperis status reinstated, plaintiff may seek a refund of his filing costs.

22

Furthermore, this court notes that plaintiff has engaged in a series of dilatory tactics, a prime reason

23

why this over five-year old case has yet to proceed past the pleadings. Here, plaintiff was made aware of

24

this court’s intention to revoke his in forma pauperis status as early as the magistrate judge’s order to show

25

cause, filed on February 7, 2012. On March 14, 2012, the magistrate judge issued a report and

26

recommendation that plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status be revoked. The filing fee was initially due on

27

March 30, 2012. When plaintiff sought to challenge the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation by

28

filing extensions, this due date was vacated. Plaintiff sought, and received, extensions in which to file his
objections to the report and recommendation. (Docs. #373 and 374). These extensions further delayed

1

the payment’s due date. Plaintiff also sought to stay this court’s order on the magistrate judge’s report and

2

recommendation. Finally, on the last day before the filing fee was due, plaintiff filed the instant motion

3

seeking to vacate the due date. Given the tortured history of this case and plaintiff’s repeated efforts to

4

prolong this litigation, such actions will not be tolerated.

5
6

If plaintiff wishes to maintain a lawsuit in federal court, he shall pay the appropriate filing fee as
he no longer benefits from in forma pauperis status.

7

Accordingly,

8

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff’s motion to vacate (doc.

9
10

#381) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.
DATED May 2, 2012.

11
12
13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2