Singleton v. Pough
Filing
9
ORDER of Dismissal. ORDERED that the Prisoner Complaint and the action are dismissed without prejudice. FURTHER ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied. It is FURTHER ORDERED that any pending motions are denied as moot. by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 3/22/13.(mjgsl, )
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 13-cv-00397-BNB
KARL HEINZ SINGLETON,
Plaintiff,
v.
PAM PLOUGH, Warden, Four Mile Corr. Cen.
CPT. MAESTES, Four Mile Center Supervisor,
LT. RICHARDS, Hearing Officer, and
LT. RIVERA, 2nd Shift Commander,
Defendants.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Plaintiff, Karl Heinz Singleton, is a prisoner in the custody of the Colorado
Department of Corrections who currently is incarcerated at the Four Mile Correctional
Center in Cañon City, Colorado. He attempted to initiate the instant action by
submitting pro se a motion for injunctive relief (ECF No. 1), a prisoner’s motion and
affidavit for leave to proceed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (ECF No. 3), and a letter
(ECF No. 4).
The Court reviewed the document and determined it was deficient. Therefore, on
February 14, 2013, Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland entered an order (ECF No. 5)
directing Mr. Singleton to cure certain enumerated deficiencies in the case within thirty
days if he wished to pursue his claims.
The February 14 order pointed out that Mr. Singleton failed to submit either the
$350.00 filing fee or a Prisoner’s Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915 on the proper, Court-approved form, i.e., the current form revised
October 1, 2012, with an authorization and certificate of prison official, together with a
certified copy of his trust fund account statement for the six-month period immediately
preceding this filing obtained from the appropriate prison official. The February 14 order
also pointed out that Mr. Singleton failed to submit on the proper, Court-approved form
a Prisoner Complaint. The order directed him to obtain, with the assistance of his case
manager or the facility’s legal assistant, the Court-approved forms for filing a Prisoner’s
Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and a Prisoner
Complaint. The February 14 order warned Mr. Singleton that if he failed to cure the
designated deficiencies within thirty days, the action would be dismissed without
prejudice and without further notice.
On February 25, 2013, Mr. Singleton submitted the first page of a Prisoner’s
Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 on an outdated
form together with a copy of his trust fund account statement for the six-month period
immediately preceding this filing that is not clearly certified by the appropriate prison
official, and an affidavit of indigence he created and signed himself. See ECF No. 7.
He also submitted a Prisoner Complaint (ECF No. 8)
Mr. Singleton has failed to cure all the designated deficiencies within the time
allowed. Therefore, the action will be dismissed without prejudice for Mr. Singleton’s
failure to cure the designated deficiencies as directed within the time allowed.
Finally, the Court certifies pursuant to § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this
order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status will be
denied for the purpose of appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438
2
(1962). If Mr. Singleton files a notice of appeal he also must pay the full $455.00
appellate filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in the United States
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit within thirty days in accordance with Fed. R. App.
P. 24.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the Prisoner Complaint and the action are dismissed without
prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the failure of
Plaintiff, Karl Heinz Singleton, to cure all the deficiencies designated in the order to cure
of February 14, 2013, within the time allowed. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is
denied. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that any pending motions are denied as moot.
DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 22nd
day of
March
, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/Lewis T. Babcock
LEWIS T. BABCOCK
Senior Judge, United States District Court
3
]]>
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?
