Hewitt v. Bouch

Filing 22

ORDER directing Clerk not to authorize service and advising plaintiff to notify Clerk in writing of any change of address. Plaintiff has incurred a debt to the U.S.A. in the amount of $350. Signed by Magistrate Judge Paige J Gossett on 5/4/2015. (gmil)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Steven L. Hewitt, also known as Steven Lee
)
Hewitt, Sr., also known as, Steven Lee Hewitt, )
also known as, Steven Hewitt,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
Cpl. Bouch,
)
)
Defendant.
)
_____________________________________ )

C/A No. 0:15-721-MGL-PJG

ORDER

This is a civil action filed by a state prisoner. Therefore, in the event that a limitations issue
arises, Plaintiff shall have the benefit of the holding in Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988)
(prisoner’s pleading was filed at the moment of delivery to prison authorities for forwarding to
District Court). Under Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.), pretrial proceedings in this action
have been referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge.
By order issued on March 25, 2015 the court allowed Plaintiff an opportunity to bring this
case into proper form for initial review. (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiff complied with the court’s order.
PAYMENT OF THE FILING FEE:
By filing this case, Plaintiff has incurred a debt to the United States of America in the amount
of $350.1 See 28 U.S.C. § 1914. This debt is not dischargeable in the event Plaintiff seeks relief
under the bankruptcy provisions of the United States Code. See 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(17). The Prison
Litigation Reform Act, Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (1996), permits a prisoner to file a civil
action without prepayment of fees or security, but requires the prisoner “to pay the full amount of
the filing fee” as funds are available. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), (b). As the court grants Plaintiff
permission to proceed in forma pauperis below, the agency having custody of Plaintiff shall
collect payments from Plaintiff’s prisoner trust account in accordance with 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(b)(1) and (2), until the full $350 filing fee is paid. See Torres v. O’Quinn, 612 F.3d 237,
252 (4th Cir. 2010) (“We hold that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2) caps the amount of funds that may be
withdrawn from an inmate's trust account at a maximum of twenty percent regardless of the number
of cases or appeals the inmate has filed.”) (emphasis in original).

1

Effective May 1, 2013, an administrative fee of $50 is added to the filing fee of $350. The
$50 administrative fee, however, is not applicable to in forma pauperis cases.
Page 1 of 2

Plaintiff has submitted an Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees
or Costs (Form AO 240) and a Financial Certificate, which are construed as a Motion for Leave to
Proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), (2). A review of the Motion reveals that
Plaintiff does not have the funds to pay the first installment of the filing fee. Therefore, the amount
due from Plaintiff is currently $350.
Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is granted. (ECF No. 16.)
TO THE CLERK OF COURT:
This case is subject to summary dismissal based on an initial screening conducted pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. §1915 and/or 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Therefore, the Clerk of Court shall not issue the
summons or forward this matter to the United States Marshal for service of process at this time.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________________________________
Paige J. Gossett
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
May 4, 2015
Columbia, South Carolina

Page 2 of 2