KONCZYK v. COUNTY OF CAPE MAY et al

Filing 5

ORDER, MEMORANDUM Clerk shall reopen case, IFP is GRANTED. Directing Clerk to file the Complaint and not to issue Summons. Directing Clerk to mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff. Signed by Judge Robert B. Kugler on 3/31/16. (jbk, )

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY _________________________________________ ERIC KONCZYK, : : Plaintiff, : Civ. No. 16-1526 (RBK) (JS) : v. : : COUNTY OF CAPY MAY, et al., : MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : Defendants. : _________________________________________ : Plaintiff is proceeding pro se with a civil rights complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Previously, on March 28, 2016, this Court denied Plaintiff’s original application to proceed in forma pauperis without prejudice as it was incomplete and the matter was administratively terminated. After this Court signed the March 28, 2016 Order, but prior to it being entered on the docket, Plaintiff filed a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis. (See Dkt. No. 2) Accordingly, this Court will order the Clerk to reopen this case. Leave to proceed in this Court without prepayment of fees is authorized. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915. This case is subject to sua sponte screening by the Court, and the Complaint will be screened in due course. Therefore, IT IS this 31st day of March, 2016, ORDERED that the Clerk shall reopen this case; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis is hereby granted; and it is further ORDERED that the Complaint shall be filed; and it is further ORDERED that SUMMONS SHALL NOT ISSUE, at this time, as the Court’s sua sponte screening has not yet been completed; and it is further ORDERED that the time to serve process under FED. R. CIV. P. 4(m) is hereby extended to the date 90 days after the Court permits the Complaint to proceed; and it is further ORDERED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b) and for purposes of account deduction only, the Clerk shall serve a copy of this Order by regular mail upon the Attorney General of the State of New Jersey and the warden of the Cape May County Correction Center; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff is assessed a filing fee of $350.00 and shall pay the entire filing fee in the manner set forth in this Order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) and (2), regardless of the outcome of the litigation, meaning that if the Court dismisses the case as a result of its sua sponte screening, or Plaintiff’s case is otherwise administratively terminated or closed, § 1915 does not suspend installment payments of the filing fee or permit refund to the prisoner of the filing fee, or any part of it, that has already been paid; and it is further ORDERED that pursuant to Bruce v. Samuels, 136 S. Ct. 627, 632 (2016), if Plaintiff owes fees for more than one court case, whether to a district or appellate court, under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) provision governing the mandatory recoupment of filing fees, Plaintiff’s monthly income is subject to a simultaneous, cumulative 20% deduction for each case a court has mandated a deduction under the PLRA; i.e., Plaintiff would be subject to a 40% deduction if there are two such cases, a 60% deduction if there are three such cases, etc., until all fees have been paid in full; and it is further ORDERED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2), in each month that the amount in Plaintiff’s account exceeds $10.00, the agency having custody of Plaintiff shall assess, deduct from Plaintiff’s account, and forward to the Clerk of the Court payment equal to 20% of the preceding month’s income credited to Plaintiff’s account, in accordance with Bruce, until the 2 $350.00 filing fee is paid. Each payment shall reference the civil docket numbers of the actions to which the payment should be credited; and it is finally ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall send a copy of this Order to Plaintiff by regular U.S. mail. s/Robert B. Kugler ROBERT B. KUGLER United States District Judge 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?