JONES v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Filing 2

OPINION. Signed by Judge Noel L. Hillman on 6/29/2015. (bdk, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
___________________________________
:
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
v.
:
:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
:
:
Defendant.
:
___________________________________:
DONALD JONES,

Civ. No. 15-4420(NLH)
OPINION

APPEARANCES:
Donald Jones, #54517-066
FCI Allenwood
P.O. Box 2000
White Deer, PA 17887
Plaintiff Pro se

HILLMAN, District Judge
Plaintiff Donald Jones, a prisoner confined at the Federal
Correctional Institution in Allenwood, Pennsylvania, seeks to
bring this civil action in forma pauperis, without prepayment of
fees or security, asserting claims pursuant to the Federal Tort
Claims Act (“FTCA”).
A brief summary of Plaintiff’s litigation history will be
helpful to the parties.

Plaintiff first filed a Complaint

asserting claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and requested
leave to proceed in forma pauperis on January 6, 2014. See Jones
v. Samuels, et al., No. 14-139 (NLH) (ECF No. 1).

In an Order

dated August 12, 2014, this Court dismissed Plaintiff’s claims

against all Defendants and the civil case was terminated. Id.
(ECF No. 25).

Plaintiff then filed an appeal which remains

pending before the Third Circuit. See Jones v. Samuels, et al.,
App. No. 14-3736.
Although the appeal was pending, Plaintiff submitted an
“Amended Complaint” and a Motion to Reopen in Civil Case No. 14139. See Jones v. Samuels, et al., No. 14-139 (NLH) (ECF Nos.
35, 36).

The Court addressed these filings in an Order dated

June 11, 2015 and, to the extent necessary, dismissed them for
lack of jurisdiction in light of the pending appeal. See Jones
v. Samuels, et al., No. 14-139 (NLH) (ECF No. 37).

The Order

informed Plaintiff that he could file a new civil case, if he so
desired; but the Court made no findings as to the merits of such
an action or as to whether such an action would be so related to
the earlier matter as to be covered by the appellate stay
described above.

The Order also informed Plaintiff that if he

chose to bring a separate action, he would be obligated to pay
another filing fee.
Plaintiff has now filed a new civil complaint.

However, he

has not paid the filing fee or submitted an in forma pauperis
application.
Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 54.3, the Clerk shall not be
required to enter any suit, file any paper, issue any process,
or render any other service for which a fee is prescribed,
2

unless the fee is paid in advance.

Under certain circumstances,

however, this Court may permit an indigent plaintiff to proceed
in forma pauperis.
The entire fee to be paid in advance of filing a civil
complaint is $400. That fee includes a filing fee of $350 plus
an administrative fee of $50, for a total of $400.

A prisoner

who is granted in forma pauperis status will, instead, be
assessed a filing fee of $350 and will not be responsible for
the $50 administrative fee.

A prisoner who is denied in forma

pauperis status must pay the full $400, including the $350
filing fee and the $50 administrative fee, before the complaint
will be filed.
Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915, establishes certain financial
requirements for prisoners who are attempting to bring a civil
action in forma pauperis.

Under § 1915, a prisoner seeking to

bring a civil action in forma pauperis must submit an affidavit,
including a statement of all assets and liabilities, which
states that the prisoner is unable to pay the fee. 28 U.S.C. §
1915(a)(1).

The prisoner also must submit a certified copy of

his inmate trust fund account statement(s) for the six-month
period immediately preceding the filing of his complaint. 28
U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2).

The prisoner must obtain this certified

statement from the appropriate official of each correctional

3

facility at which he was or is confined during such six-month
period. Id.
If the prisoner is granted in forma pauperis status, the
prisoner must pay the full amount of the $350 filing fee, in
installments, as follows. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).

In each month

that the amount in the prisoner’s account exceeds $10.00, until
the $350.00 filing fee is paid, the agency having custody of the
prisoner shall assess, deduct from the prisoner’s account, and
forward to the Clerk of the Court an installment payment equal
to 20% of the preceding month’s income credited to the
prisoner’s account. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).
Whether or not the full filing fee, or any part of it, has
been paid, the Court must dismiss the case if it finds that the
action: (1) is frivolous or malicious; (2) fails to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted; or (3) seeks monetary
relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (in forma pauperis actions); see also 28
U.S.C. § 1915A (dismissal of actions in which prisoner seeks
redress from a governmental defendant); 42 U.S.C. § 1997e
(dismissal of prisoner actions brought with respect to prison
conditions).

If the Court dismisses the case for any of these

reasons, § 1915 does not suspend installment payments of the
filing fee or permit the prisoner to get back the filing fee, or
any part of it, that has already been paid.
4

If the prisoner has, on three or more prior occasions while
incarcerated, brought in federal court an action or appeal that
was dismissed on the grounds that it was frivolous or malicious,
or that it failed to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted, he cannot bring another action in forma pauperis unless
he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. §
1915(g).
In this action, Plaintiff failed to either pay the filing
fee or submit a complete in forma pauperis application as
required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), (2). See, e.g., Hairston,
Sr. v. Gronolsky, 348 F. App’x 716 (3d Cir. 2009) (affirming
administrative termination of prisoner civil rights action for
failure to comply with requirements of § 1915); Tyson v. Youth
Ventures, L.L.C., 42 F. App’x 221 (10th Cir. 2002) (affirming
dismissal without prejudice of civil action where prisoner
submitted only uncertified copy of institutional account
statement); Johnson v. United States, 79 Fed.Cl. 769 (2007)
(same). See also Rohn v. Johnston, 415 F. App’x 353, 354-55 (3d
Cir. 2011) (affirming dismissal without prejudice of civil
action where prisoner failed to submit the required affidavit of
poverty).
To the extent Plaintiff asserts that correctional officials
have refused to provide the certified account statement, any
such assertion must be supported by an affidavit detailing the
5

circumstances of Plaintiff’s request for a certified
institutional account statement and the correctional officials’
refusal to comply, including the dates of such events and the
names of the individuals involved.
The allegations of the Complaint do not suggest that
Plaintiff is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, the Clerk of the Court will
be ordered to administratively terminate this action, without
filing the Complaint or assessing a filing fee. 1

Plaintiff will

be granted leave to apply to re-open within 30 days.

An

appropriate Order will be entered.
___s/ Noel L. Hillman_____
NOEL L. HILLMAN
United States District Judge
Dated: June 29, 2015
At Camden, New Jersey

1

Such an administrative termination is not a “dismissal” for
purposes of the statute of limitations, and if the case is reopened pursuant to the terms of the accompanying Order, it is
not subject to the statute of limitations time bar if it was
originally submitted timely. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266
(1988) (prisoner mailbox rule); Papotto v. Hartford Life & Acc.
Ins. Co., 731 F.3d 265, 275-76 (3d Cir. 2013) (collecting cases
and explaining that a District Court retains jurisdiction over,
and can re-open, administratively closed cases).
6