WEST v. MATTHEWS et al

Filing 13

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER : The Clerk shall REOPEN the case by making a new and separate docket entry reading CIVIL CASE REOPENED; Plaintiff's application to proceed IFP, (ECF No. 11), is hereby DENIED WITH PREJUDICE; The Clerk shall ADMINIST RATIVELY TERMINATE this case, without filing the Complaint or assessing a filing fee; If Plaintiff wishes to reopen this case, he shall so notify the Court, in writing, within thirty (30) days of the date of entry of this Order; The Clerk shall CLOSE the file, etc. Signed by Judge Claire C. Cecchi on 05/25/2018. (ek, )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

MICHAEL WEST,
Civil Action No. 17-1169 (CCC)
Plaintiff,
v.

:

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

KEVIN P. MATfHEWS, et al.,
Defendants.

Plaintiff Michael West, a prisoner currently confined at the federal Correctional Institution
in fort Dix, New Jersey, seeks to bring this civil action in forma pauperis (“IFP”), without
prepayment of fees or security, asserting claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983. The Court

previously denied his first IFP application, on the account that he failed to submit a proper sixmonth prison account statement as required by 2$ U.S.C.

§ 1915(a). The Court expressly notified

Plaintiff that he must submit an account statement “cover[ing] the period between August 11, 2016
and february 11, 2017.” (ECF No. 3 at 2.) Plaintiff then filed two more IfP applications, (ECF
Nos. 4, 8), both of which the Court denied because Plaintiff did not submit the proper six-month
account statement covering the aforementioned period. (See ECF Nos. 5, 10.) The Court also
noted in its most recent Order that Plaintiff’s account statement was not certified. (ECF No. 10 at
1.) The Court permitted Plaintiff to amend his IfP application one last time, but warned that failure
to perfect his application will result in the denial of his IfP request with prejudice. (Id. at 2.)
Presently before the Court is Plaintiffs fourth IfP application. (ECF No. 11.) Plaintiff
again fails to adhere to the Court’s direction. Specifically, Plaintiff has submitted with the instant
IfP application an account statement dating from December 21, 2016 to September 25, 2017,

which does not cover the six-month period immediately preceding the Complaint (i.e., the period
between August 11, 2016 and February 11, 2017), and the statement is not certified by an
authorized prison official. Having already provided Plaintiff with three opportunities to file a
proper IFP application, the Court hereby denies Plaintiffs fourth IFP application with prejudice.
IT IS therefore on this 2-

day of

,

201$,

ORDERED that the Clerk shall REOPEN the case by making a new and separate docket

entry reading “CIVIL CASE REOPENED”; it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s application to proceed IFP, (ECF No. 11), is hereby DENIED
WITH PREJUDICE; it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk shall ADMINISTRATIVELY TERMINATE this case,

without filing the Complaint or assessing a filing fee; it is further
ORDERED that if Plaintiff wishes to reopen this case, he shall so notify the Court, in
writing, within thirty (30) days of the date of entry of this Order; Plaintiffs writing shall include
the $400 fee, including the $350 filing fçe plus the $50 administrative fee; it is further
ORDERED that upon receipt of a written request from Plaintiff stating that he wishes to

reopen this case, and payment of the filing and administrative fees within the time allotted by the
Court, the Clerk will be directed to reopen this case; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk shall serve a copy of this Order upon Plaintiff by regular mail,

and shall CLOSE the file.
SO ORDERED.

Claire C. Cecchi, U.S.D.J.

2