REDDING v. NEW JERSEY STATE PAROLE et al
Filing
2
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Freda L. Wolfson on 1/9/2012. (gxh)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
JAZAAR REDDING,
Plaintiff,
v.
NEW JERSEY STATE PAROLE,
et al.,
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Civil Action No. 11-7161 (FLW)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
APPEARANCES:
Plaintiff pro se
Jazaar Redding
Bo Robinson Treatment Center
377 Enterprise Avenue
Trenton, NJ 08638
WOLFSON, District Judge
Plaintiff Jazaar Redding, a prisoner confined at Bo Robinson
Treatment Center in Trenton, New Jersey, seeks to bring this
civil action asserting claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Plaintiff neither prepaid the $350 filing fee nor submitted an
application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
Civil actions brought in forma pauperis are governed by 28
U.S.C. § 1915.
The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Pub. L.
No. 104-135, 110 Stat. 1321 (April 26, 1996) (the “PLRA”), which
amends 28 U.S.C. § 1915, establishes certain financial
requirements for prisoners who are attempting to bring a civil
action or file an appeal in forma pauperis.
Under the PLRA, a prisoner seeking to bring 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(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 facility at which he was or is confined.
Id.
Even if the prisoner is granted in forma pauperis status,
the prisoner must pay the full amount of the $350 filing fee in
installments.
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).
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: (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
2
such relief.
actions).
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (in forma pauperis
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, the PLRA 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.
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).
As noted above, in this action, Plaintiff failed either to
prepay the filing fee or to submit a complete in forma pauperis
application as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), (2), including
a certified institutional account statement.
See, e.g., Tyson v.
Youth Ventures, L.L.C., 42 Fed.Appx. 221 (10th Cir. 2002);
Johnson v. United States, 79 Fed.Cl. 769 (2007).
The allegations of the Complaint do not suggest that
Plaintiff is in imminent danger of serious physical injury.
3
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.
Plaintiff will
be granted leave to move to re-open within 30 days.1
An appropriate Order will be entered.
S/Freda L. Wolfson
Freda L. Wolfson
United States District Judge
Dated: January 9, 2012
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 filed timely. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266
(1988) (prisoner mailbox rule); McDowell v. Delaware State
Police, 88 F.3d 188, 191 (3d Cir. 1996); see also Williams-Guice
v. Board of Education, 45 F.3d 161, 163 (7th Cir. 1995).
4
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?