-AMD GREEN v. TAYLOR et al, No. 1:2010cv01191 - Document 2 (D.N.J. 2010)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM and OPINION. Signed by Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 3/16/2010. (nz, )

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY MELVIN GREEN, Plaintiff, v. ERIC TAYLOR, et al., Defendants. : : : : : : : : : Civil Action No. 10-1191 (RMB) MEMORANDUM OPINION APPEARANCES: Plaintiff pro se Melvin Green Camden County Correctional Facility P.O. Box 90431 Camden, NJ 08101 BUMB, District Judge Plaintiff Melvin Green, a prisoner confined at Camden County Correctional Facility in Camden, New Jersey, seeks to bring this civil action in forma pauperis, without prepayment of fees or security, asserting claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Civil actions brought in forma pauperis are governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Pub. L. No. 104-135, 110 Stat. 1321 (April 26, 1996) (the PLRA ), which amends 28 U.S.C. § 1915, establishes certain financial requirements for prisoners who are attempting to bring a civil action or file an appeal in forma pauperis. Under the PLRA, a prisoner seeking to bring a civil action in forma pauperis must submit an affidavit, including a statement of all assets, which states that the prisoner is unable to pay the fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). The prisoner also must submit a certified copy of his inmate trust fund account statement(s) for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of his complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). The prisoner must obtain this certified statement from the appropriate official of each prison at which he was or is confined. Id. Even if the prisoner is granted in forma pauperis status, the prisoner must pay the full amount of the $350 filing fee in installments. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). In each month that the amount in the prisoner s account exceeds $10.00, until the $350.00 filing fee is paid, the agency having custody of the prisoner shall assess, deduct from the prisoner s account, and forward to the Clerk of the Court an installment payment equal to 20 % of the preceding month s income credited to the prisoner s account. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). Plaintiff may not have known when he submitted his complaint that he must pay the filing fee, and that even if the full filing fee, or any part of it, has been paid, the Court must dismiss the case if it finds that the action: (1) is frivolous or malicious; (2) fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (3) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. actions). 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (in forma pauperis See also 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (dismissal of actions in 2 which prisoner seeks redress from a governmental defendant); 42 U.S.C. § 1997e (dismissal of prisoner actions brought with respect to prison conditions). If the Court dismisses the case for any of these reasons, the PLRA does not suspend installment payments of the filing fee or permit the prisoner to get back the filing fee, or any part of it, that has already been paid. If the prisoner has, on three or more prior occasions while incarcerated, brought in federal court an action or appeal that was dismissed on the grounds that it was frivolous or malicious, or that it failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, he cannot bring another action in forma pauperis unless he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). In this action, Plaintiff submitted an out-of-date form of application, which stated that the filing fee is $150, and which included Plaintiff s authorization of the assessment of that fee and withdrawal of that amount from his prison account. filing fee is, in fact, $350. The If Plaintiff is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, this Court will assess against him the full $350 filing fee, not $150. Accordingly, this Court cannot grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis based upon the out-ofdate application submitted by Plaintiff. 3 CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff s application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis will be denied without prejudice and the Clerk of the Court will be ordered to administratively terminate this action, without filing the complaint or assessing a filing fee. Plaintiff will be granted leave to move to re-open within 30 days.1 An appropriate Order will be entered. s/Renée Marie Bumb Renée Marie Bumb United States District Judge Dated: March 16, 2010 1 Such an administrative termination is not a dismissal for purposes of the statute of limitations, and if the case is reopened pursuant to the terms of the accompanying Order, it is not subject to the statute of limitations time bar if it was originally filed timely. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988) (prisoner mailbox rule); McDowell v. Delaware State Police, 88 F.3d 188, 191 (3d Cir. 1996); see also Williams-Guice v. Board of Education, 45 F.3d 161, 163 (7th Cir. 1995). 4

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.