FARRELL v. WARDEN

Filing 2

OPINION. Signed by Judge Noel L. Hillman on 4/21/2020. (cry, )

Case 1:20-cv-04414-NLH Document 2 Filed 04/21/20 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
______________________________
:
SEAN FARRELL,
:
:
Petitioner,
:
Civ. No. 20-4414 (NLH)
:
v.
:
OPINION
:
:
WARDEN, FAIRTON F.C.I.,
:
:
:
Respondent.
:
______________________________:
APPEARANCE:
Sean Farrell
58966-066
Fairton
Federal Correctional Institution
P.O. Box 420
Fairton, NJ 08320
Petitioner Pro se
HILLMAN, District Judge
Petitioner Sean Farrell seeks to bring a petition for writ
of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.

See ECF No. 1

(petition).
Filing Fee
The filing fee for a petition for writ of habeas corpus is
$5.00.

Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 54.3(a), the filing fee is

required to be paid at the time the petition is presented for
filing.

Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 81.2(b), whenever a

prisoner submits a petition for writ of habeas corpus and seeks

Case 1:20-cv-04414-NLH Document 2 Filed 04/21/20 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 13

to proceed in forma pauperis, that petitioner must submit (a) an
affidavit setting forth information which establishes that the
petitioner is unable to pay the fees and costs of the
proceedings, and (b) a certification signed by an authorized
officer of the institution certifying (1) the amount presently
on deposit in the prisoner’s prison account and, (2) the
greatest amount on deposit in the prisoner’s institutional
account during the six-month period prior to the date of the
certification.

If the institutional account of the petitioner

exceeds $200, the petitioner shall not be considered eligible to
proceed in forma pauperis.

L. Civ. R. 81.2(c).

Here, Petitioner has failed to either include the $5 filing
fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis.

Petitioner

must either submit the $5 filing fee or a complete application
to proceed in forma pauperis for his habeas petition to be
considered.
Conclusion
For the reason set forth above, the Clerk of Court will be
ordered to administratively terminate this Petition without
prejudice. 1

Petitioner will be granted leave to apply to re-open

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.
2

Case 1:20-cv-04414-NLH Document 2 Filed 04/21/20 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 14

within thirty (30) days, by paying the filing fee of $5.00 or
submitted a complete in forma pauperis application.

An

appropriate Order will be entered.

Dated: April 21, 2020
At Camden, New Jersey

s/ Noel L. Hillman
NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J.

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).
3