RUDY v. JOHN DOE et al
Filing
2
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Robert B. Kugler on 6/21/18. (jbk,)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
ROBERT JOHN RUDY,
Civil Action No. 18-10387 (RBK)
Plaintiff,
v.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JOHN DOE, et al,
Defendants.
ROBERT B. KUGLER, U.S.D.J.
Plaintiff Robert John Rudy, an inmate confined at South Woods State Prison in Bridgeton,
New Jersey, seeks to bring this civil action in forma pauperis, without prepayment of fees or
security, asserting claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995
(the “Act”), which amends 28 U.S.C. § 1915, establishes certain financial requirements for
prisoners who are attempting to bring a civil action in forma pauperis.
Under the Act, a prisoner bringing a civil action in forma pauperis must submit an affidavit,
including a statement of all assets, 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 for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of his complaint. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a)(2). The prisoner must obtain this statement from the appropriate official of each prison
at which he was or is confined. Id.
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. If in forma pauperis status is denied, the prisoner must pay the full
$400, including the $350 filing fee and the $50 administrative fee, before the complaint will be
filed.
If the prisoner is granted in forma pauperis status, the prisoner must pay the full amount of
the $350 filing fee 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, payment equal to 20% of the preceding month’s income credited to the prisoner’s account.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).
Plaintiff may not have known when he submitted his complaint that he must pay the filing
fee, and that even if the full filing fee, or any part of it, has been paid, the Court must dismiss the
case if it finds that the action is: (1) 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). If the Court dismisses the case for any of these reasons, the Act
does not permit the prisoner to get his filing fee back.
In this action, the prison account statement submitted by Plaintiff shows that he had an
income of $1,800.27 in the six months prior to the filing of the Complaint. As such, Plaintiff had
an income in excess of an average of $300 a month during that time period. As such, Plaintiff has
not established his inability to pay the filing fee. In Shahin v. Sec. of Del., 532 F. App’x 123, 124
(3d Cir. 2013), the Third Circuit upheld an in forma pauperis denial by the district court, even
when the plaintiff showed that she only had a monthly income of $95 from self-employment.
Because the plaintiff was provided, by her husband, “with food, clothing, shelter, paying her
medical and travel expenses and even her business losses,” the Third Circuit reasoned, “requiring
[plaintiff] to pay her own litigation expenses, although requiring her to save for several months,
2
would not deprive her of the ‘necessities of life.’” Id. Here, Plaintiff’s income is more than three
times the $95/month threshold established in Shahin, and Plaintiff is also similarly situated in that
he has his food, clothing, shelter, and medical expenses paid for by the prison. See Bruce v.
Samuels, 136 S. Ct. 627, 632 (2016) (finding that because prisons “are constitutionally bound to
provide inmates with adequate food, clothing, shelter, and medical care . . . and must furnish paper
and pen to draft legal documents and stamps to mail them,” the consequences of leaving a prisoner
without money for amenities does not override the statutory objective of containing prisoner
litigation for the purposes of § 1915). Like the plaintiff in Shahin, Plaintiff may have to save up
in order to pay the filing fee, but such requirement “would not deprive [him] of the ‘necessities of
life.’” 532 F. App’x at 124. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis application is denied. The
denial is without prejudice, to allow Plaintiff an opportunity to establish his indigence despite the
apparent income. See Cordero v. Kelley, No. 17-2812, 2018 WL 2149295, at *1 (3d Cir. May 10,
2018).
An appropriate order follows.
Dated: June 21
, 2018
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?