Branch v. Leaman et al

Filing 7

ORDER Denying without prejudice Plaintiff's 1 Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. If Plaintiff wishes to continue pursuing this lawsuit he must file a new application to proceed in forma pauperis no later than 6/29/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 6/10/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
10
DESHAME BRANCH,
11
12
13
14
15

)
)
Plaintiff(s),
)
)
vs.
)
)
V. LEAMAN, et al.,
)
)
Defendant(s).
)
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:14-cv-02007-RCJ-NJK
ORDER
(Docket No. 1)

16

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Deshame Branch’s Application to Proceed In Forma

17

Pauperis. Docket No. 1. When Plaintiff initiated this case, he was incarcerated. See id. Plaintiff has filed

18

a notice of change of address since that time, however, and it appears that he is no longer incarcerated. See

19

Docket No. 5. To the extent Plaintiff seeks to continue pursuing this action, he must submit a new

20

application to proceed in forma pauperis reflecting his current financial situation. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s

21

pending Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Docket No. 1) is hereby DENIED without prejudice.

22

If Plaintiff wishes to continue pursuing this lawsuit, he must file a new application to proceed in forma

23

pauperis no later than June 29, 2015. THE FAILURE TO FILE AN APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN

24

FORMA PAUPERIS BY THAT DATE WILL RESULT IN A RECOMMENDATION THAT THIS CASE

25

BE DISMISSED.

26

Plaintiff should carefully consider whether he would like to continue with this case. When a

27

prisoner initiates a lawsuit, he is ultimately responsible for paying the full amount of the filing fee even if

28

he is granted in forma pauperis status. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). If a prisoner is released after initiating

1

the lawsuit, he is still ultimately responsible for paying the entirety of the fee. See, e.g., Putzer v. Attal,

2

2013 WL 4519351, *3 (D. Nev. Aug. 23, 2013) (discussing split of authority). As the Court has previously

3

indicated, it does not appear that Plaintiff’s claims will survive the pleading stage. See Docket No. 2. In

4

the event that Plaintiff files a new application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court will screen his

5

complaint and at that point he will be ultimately responsible for paying the filing fee even in the event that

6

his complaint is dismissed.

7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

Dated: June 10, 2015

9
10

_____________________________________
Nancy J. Koppe
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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