Moffett v. State Police et al, No. 4:2014cv00042 - Document 10 (W.D. Ky. 2014)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Chief Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr. The action will be dismissed by separate Order. The prior Order 5 obligating Plaintiff to pay the $400.00 filing fee in this action remains in full effect. cc: Plaintiff, pro se (JLS)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY OWENSBORO DIVISION LEWIS FRANCIS MOFFETT v. PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:14CV-P42-M STATE POLICE HENDERSON POST et al. DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Lewis Francis Moffett filed a pro se complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By Memorandum and Order entered May 7, 2014, this Court denied Plaintiff s application to proceed without prepayment of fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and directed him to pay the filing fee in full for the instant action within 30 days from entry of the Order (DN 5). The Court warned Plaintiff that failure to pay the filing fee within the time allowed would result in dismissal of the action. More than 30 days have passed since the Court entered its Order, and Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee. He did submit a letter (DN 6) in response to the Court s Order. The Court does not find that response persuasive. Plaintiff having failed to pay the $400 filing fee as ordered by the Court, the action will be dismissed by separate Order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to comply with a prior Order of the Court and for failure to prosecute. As the Court previously advised Plaintiff, dismissal of this action does not relieve him of his responsibility to pay the requisite filing fee in this action. In re Alea, 286 F.3d 378, 381 (6th Cir. 2002); McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 607 (6th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds by Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007). The obligation to pay the filing fee attaches when a prisoner brings a civil action. In re Alea, 286 F.3d at 381. The subsequent dismissal of the action under § 1915(g) for failure to pay that fee does not negate or nullify the litigant s continuing obligation to pay the fee in full. Id. Accordingly, the prior Order (DN 5) obligating Plaintiff to pay the $400.00 filing fee in this action remains in full effect. Date: August 4, 2014 cc: Plaintiff, pro se 4414.005 2

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.