Ramos-Rodriguez v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department et al

Filing 4

ORDER Denying without Prejudice 3 Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk of the Court shall send Plaintiff a blank application form for incarcerated litigants with instructions. Plaintiff must comply with this order no later than 8/28/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 7/29/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DC)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7
8
9
10
11
12

MANUEL RAMOS-RODRIGUEZ,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE
)
DEPARTMENT, et al,
)
)
Defendants. )
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:15-cv-01212-GMN-NJK
ORDER
(IFP App - Docket No. 3)

13
14

Plaintiff Manuel Ramos-Rodriguez is proceeding in this action pro se, requested authority pursuant

15

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to proceed in forma pauperis, and submitted a Complaint (Docket No. 1) on June 25,

16

2015. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule IB 1-9.

17

On June 26, 2015, the Court denied Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis without

18

prejudice. Docket No. 2. The Court found that Plaintiff failed to include a recent (within the past six

19

months) signed financial certificate by an authorized officer of the institution in which he is incarcerated,

20

a certified copy of his inmate trust account statement, and a signed financial affidavit as required by 28

21

U.S.C. §1915(a)(2) and LSR 1-2. Id., at 1. The Court allowed Plaintiff until July 27, 2015, to either file

22

a new application accompanied by a recent (within the past six months) signed and executed financial

23

certificate, a signed and executed financial affidavit, and a certified statement of his inmate trust account,

24

or to pay the $350 filing fee. Id., at 1-2.

25

On July 21, 2015, Plaintiff filed a new application to proceed in forma pauperis. Docket No. 3.

26

Although Plaintiff included a statement of his inmate trust account, this application is incomplete. Plaintiff

27

filed only the first page of the application, rather than the entire application. Additionally, his lack of

28

response to question 1b differs from his response on his initial application. Docket No. 1 at 1; Docket No.

1

3 at 1. Additionally, Plaintiff has failed to submit a signed acknowledgment that he has read the application

2

and that the information is true and correct, along with the other required acknowledgments on that page.

3

See Docket No. 3; Docket No. 1 at 3. Finally, Plaintiff included a financial certificate that appears to differ

4

materially from the one he initially submitted. Docket No. 1 at 4; Docket No. 3 at 3, 6. As such, Plaintiff’s

5

second in forma pauperis application is denied without prejudice.

6

The Court will retain Plaintiff’s complaint (Docket No. 1-1), but will not file it until the matter of

7

the payment of the filing fee is resolved. Plaintiff will be granted one final opportunity to cure the

8

deficiencies of his application to proceed in forma pauperis, or in the alternative, pay the full filing fee for

9

this action. If Plaintiff chooses to file a new application to proceed in forma pauperis, he must file a fully

10

complete application to proceed in forma pauperis.

11

Accordingly,

12

IT IS ORDERED:

13

1.

14
15

Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Docket No. 3, is DENIED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

2.

Plaintiff shall file a new Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis, accompanied by a

16

recent (within the past six months) signed and executed financial certificate, a signed and

17

executed financial affidavit, and a certified statement of his inmate trust account.

18

3.

19
20

with instructions.
4.

21
22

The Clerk of the Court shall send Plaintiff a blank application form for incarcerated litigants

Alternatively, Plaintiff shall make the necessary arrangements to pay the filing fee of three
hundred fifty dollars accompanied by a copy of this order.

5.

Plaintiff must comply with this order no later than August 28, 2015. Failure to comply in

23

full will result a recommendation to the District Judge that this case be dismissed for failure

24

to comply with this order.

25

Dated this 29th day of July, 2015.

26
27
28

________________________________________
NANCY J. KOPPE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
2