Brown v. Holloway

Filing 4

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO COMPLY WITH 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) OR PAY THE $400 CIVIL FILING FEE. Signed by Judge James D. Todd on 2/24/17. (Todd, James)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
WESTERN DIVISION
LLOYD BROWN,
Plaintiff,
VS.
JUANITA HOLLOWAY,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 17-2123-JDT-cgc

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO COMPLY WITH 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2)
OR PAY THE $400 CIVIL FILING FEE

On February 21, 2017, Plaintiff Lloyd Brown, who is incarcerated at the Northwest
Correctional Complex in Tiptonville, Tennessee, filed a civil complaint accompanied by a
motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF Nos. 1 & 2.)
Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a)-(b), a
prisoner bringing a civil action must pay the filing fee required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a).
Although the obligation to pay the fee accrues at the moment the case is filed, see McGore
v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 605 (6th Cir. 1997), partially overruled on other grounds
by LaFountain v. Harry, 716 F.3d 944, 951 (6th Cir. 2013), the PLRA provides the prisoner
the opportunity to make a “down payment” of a partial filing fee and pay the remainder in
installments. § 1915(b)(2). However, in order to take advantage of the installment
procedures, the prisoner must properly complete and submit to the district court, along with

the complaint, an in forma pauperis affidavit containing a current certification by the prison
trust account officer and a copy of his trust account statement for the six months immediately
preceding the filing of the complaint. § 1915(a)(2).
In this case, the affidavit submitted by Plaintiff is not accompanied by a certified copy
of his trust account statement.1 Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED to submit, within 30
days after the date of this order, either the entire $400 civil filing fee2 or a copy of his trust
account statement for the last six months.3 If Plaintiff needs additional time to file the
required document, he may request one 30-day extension of time from this Court. McGore,
114 F.3d at 605.
If Plaintiff timely submits the necessary document and the Court finds that he is
indeed indigent, the Court will grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and assess a filing
fee of $350 in accordance with the installment procedures of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). However,
if Plaintiff fails to comply with this order in a timely manner, the Court will deny leave to

1

Attached to Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis affidavit is a document titled “Important
Notice to Prisoners” that attempts to explain to an incarcerated plaintiff how to obtain pauper
status under the PLRA. (ECF No. 2-1.) It is unclear where the notice originated. However,
while the notice does refer to the requirement that prisoners submit a copy of their trust account
statement, Plaintiff did not actually attach the statement.
2

Twenty-eight U.S.C. § 1914(a) requires a civil filing fee of $350. In addition, § 1914(b)
requires the clerk to “collect from the parties such additional fees . . . as are prescribed by the
Judicial Conference of the United States.” The Judicial Conference has prescribed an additional
administrative fee of $50 for filing any civil case, except for cases seeking habeas corpus and
cases in which the plaintiff is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915. Therefore, if Plaintiff is ultimately granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in
accordance with the PLRA, he will not be responsible for the additional $50 fee.
3

Plaintiff does not need to submit another in forma pauperis affidavit.
2

proceed in forma pauperis, assess the entire $400 filing fee without regard to the installment
payment procedures, and dismiss the action without further notice pursuant to Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 41(b), for failure to prosecute. McGore, 114 F.3d at 605.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ James D. Todd
JAMES D. TODD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

4

Even a voluntary dismissal by Plaintiff will not eliminate the obligation to pay the filing
fee. McGore, 114 F.3d at 607; see also In re Alea, 286 F.3d 378, 381 (6th Cir. 2002).
3