Greystoke v. Clallam County Corrections Facility et al

Filing 18

ORDER ON 17 JUNE 14, 2019 PLEADING, by Judge Robert J. Bryan. **3 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL** (John Greystoke, Prisoner ID: 403362) (ERA)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

8
9
10
11

SIR JOHN GREYSTROKE,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14

v.
CLALLAM COUNTY CORRECTIONS
FACILITY, et. al.,
Defendants.

15
16

and

17

SIR JOHN GREYSTROKE,

18

Plaintiff,

19
20
21

v.
CLALLAM COUNTY
CORRECTIONS FACILITY, et. al.,

22
23

Defendants.

24

ORDER ON JUNE 14, 2019 PLEADING - 1

CASE NO. 18-5081 RJB-DWC and
18-5217 RJB-TLF
ORDER ON JUNE 14, 2019
PLEADING

1
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s June 14, 2019 pleading which was
2
filed in Greystroke v. Clallam County Corrections Facility, et. al., Western District of
3
Washington case number 18-5081 (“Case 18-5081”), Dkt. 17, and Greystroke v. Clallam County
4
Corrections Facility, et. al., Western District of Washington case number 18-5217 (“Case 185
5217”), Dkt. 23. The Court has reviewed the pleadings and the remaining files.
6
Procedural History of Case 18-5081
7
On March 14, 2018, the Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to
8
28 U.S.C. § 1915 was granted. Dkt. 6.
9
On May 29, 2018, this Court adopted a Report and Recommendation and dismissed this
10
case for failure to obey a court order. Dkt. 13. The Plaintiff did not file an appeal.
11
Procedural History of Case 18-5217
12
On June 28, 2018, the Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28
13
U.S.C. § 1915 was granted. Dkt. 10.
14
On January 1, 2019, this Court adopted a Report and Recommendation and dismissed this
15
case with prejudice. Dkt. 19. The case was found to be frivolous and the dismissal was counted
16
as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Id. The Plaintiff did not file an appeal.
17
June 14, 2019 Pleading, Filed in Both Cases
18
In the Plaintiff’s June 14, 2019 pleading, he inquires as to the status of the cases and asks
19
that the Court stop the drafts for the filing fees from being taken out of his prison trust account.
20
Dkts. 17 and 23.
21
22
23
24

ORDER ON JUNE 14, 2019 PLEADING - 2

DISCUSSION

1

To the extent that Plaintiff intends this pleading to be a motion to stop the corrections

2
3

institution from taking filing fees out of his account (Dkts. 17 and 23), the motion should be

4

denied.

5

“Section 1915(b) provides that prisoners proceeding IFP must pay the filing fee as funds

6

become available in their prison accounts.” Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1052 (9th Cir.

7

2007). The full filing fee is due even if the case is dismissed. See Id. Further, § 1915(b)(2)

8

requires “monthly payments of 20 percent of the preceding month’s income simultaneously for

9

each action pursued.” Bruce v. Samuels, 136 S.Ct. 627, 632 (2016).

10

The Plaintiff makes no showing that § 1915(b) does not apply. The filing fees should be

11

continued to be drafted from his prison account for each case he filed in accord with the 28

12

U.SC. § 1915.

13
14

Moreover, these cases are closed. Other than timely notices of appeal, further pleadings
filed by Plaintiff will be filed in the records, but the Court will not act on them.

15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16

The Clerk is directed to send uncertified copies of this Order to all counsel of record and

17
18
19
20
21

to any party appearing pro se at said party’s last known address.
Dated this 1st day of July, 2019.

A
ROBERT J. BRYAN
United States District Judge

22
23
24

ORDER ON JUNE 14, 2019 PLEADING - 3