Johnson et al v. Holder et al
Filing
5
ORDER Granting 4 Motion to reinstate plaintiffs. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 2/19/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF; CC: Plaintiffs with required documents - SLR)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
10
11
ZACHARY JOHNSON, et al.,
12
13
Plaintiffs,
14
vs.
15
ERIC HOLDER JR., et al.,
16
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
/
2:12-cv-02146-JCM-GWF
ORDER
17
18
On January 3, 2013, the court dismissed plaintiffs’ complaint without prejudice (ECF #2),
19
and judgment was entered (ECF #3). Before the court is plaintiffs’ motion to reinstate plaintiffs (ECF
20
#4).
21
The court now clarifies that one plaintiff –Zachary Johnson–submitted an application to
22
proceed in forma pauperis. However, as the court explained in its earlier order, each plaintiff must
23
submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis on the court-approved form, and each application
24
must be accompanied by all required financial documentation, as described in the instructions for use
25
of the form. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1)-(2); Local Rules of Special Proceedings 1-1, 1-2. Accordingly,
26
plaintiffs’ motion is denied. Again, if plaintiffs wish to pursue this matter, they should file a new action,
1
with a new case number, along with either the $350 filing fee or a completed application to proceed in
2
forma pauperis for each plaintiff.
3
4
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motion to reinstate plaintiffs (ECF #4)
is DENIED.
5
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the clerk SHALL SEND each plaintiff the
6
approved form for Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, as well as the document “Information and
7
Instructions for Filing a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis.”
8
February day of ______________________________, 2013.
DATED this _____ 19, 2013.
9
10
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2
]]>
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?
