Williams, Roosevelt v. Smith, Judy et al

Filing 16

ORDER denying plaintiff's 14 motion to reduce the monthly payment of his filing fee in this case. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peter Oppeneer on 5/01/2015. (nln),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
ROOSEVELT M. WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.
Case No. 14-cv-789-jdp
JUDY SMITH, et al.
Defendants.

Plaintiff Roosevelt Williams has filed a letter regarding the collection of the filing fee
in this case. (Dkt. #14). In his letter, plaintiff says that the business office at his institution
is withholding 100% of his income to pay his federal filing fee. He also says that he owes
money for other obligations and would like the withholding for his filing fee reduced to 5%
or 10% of the previous month’s deposits. I will construe plaintiff’s letter as a motion to
reduce his monthly payments of the unpaid balance of his filing fees.
A review of this court’s financial records show that the court has not received any
payments from plaintiff other than his $33.40 initial partial payment on January 6, 2015.
In addition, the March 2015 trust fund account statement that plaintiff submitted with his
letter shows that plaintiff did not have any deposits for the month of March. The statement
also shows that no money was withheld for this court case.

Since no money has been

withheld for the filing fee in this case, this court cannot address his concern. If plaintiff
needs clarification regarding his trust fund account statement, he should direct his inquiry to
his institution’s business office.
Turning to plaintiff’s request that the withholding of his filing fee be reduced to 5% or
10%, this court is bound by the provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. Under that

1

Act, an inmate who files a lawsuit in federal court under the in forma pauperis statute must pay
the statutory filing fee, first by making an initial partial payment and then by sending the
remainder of the fee to the court in installments of 20% of the preceding month’s income in
accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2) until the remaining balance for his case is paid in
full. The court has no discretion to modify this method or to exempt any part of plaintiff’s
income from withholding. Accordingly, his motion will be denied.

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to reduce the monthly payment of his filing
fee in this case, dkt. #14, is DENIED.
Entered this 1st day of May, 2015
BY THE COURT:

PETER OPPENEER
Magistrate Judge

2