From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Caines v. Pacheco

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Feb 12, 2020
20-CV-0878 (CM) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 12, 2020)

Opinion

20-CV-0878 (CM)

02-12-2020

KAMIEO CAINES, Plaintiff, v. SGT. PACHECO, ET AL., Defendants.


ORDER DIRECTING UPDATED PRISONER AUTHORIZATION :

Plaintiff, currently incarcerated at Elmira Correctional Facility, brings this action pro se. To proceed with a civil action in this Court, a prisoner must either pay $400.00 in fees - a $350.00 filing fee plus a $50.00 administrative fee - or, to request permission to proceed without prepayment of fees, submit a signed in forma pauperis (IFP) application and a prisoner authorization. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914, 1915.

If the Court grants a prisoner's IFP application, the Prison Litigation Reform Act requires the Court to collect the $350.00 filing fee in installments deducted from the prisoner's account. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). A prisoner seeking to proceed in this Court without prepayment of fees must therefore also authorize the Court to withdraw these payments from his account by filing a "prisoner authorization," which directs the facility where the prisoner is incarcerated to deduct the $350.00 filing fee from the prisoner's account in installments and to send to this Court certified copies of the prisoner's account statements for the past six months. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2), (b).

By order dated February 3, 2020, the Court directed Plaintiff, within 30 days, to either pay the $400.00 in fees or complete and submit the prisoner authorization form (attached to that order). On February 10, 2020, Plaintiff submitted an authorization regarding the filing fee but did not use the Court's form or include all of the language from the Court's form. The Court therefore extends the time for Plaintiff to submit the prisoner authorization form and directs Plaintiff to do so within 30 days from the date of this order. The Court also attaches a copy of the Court's Prisoner Authorization form with this order. If Plaintiff submits the prisoner authorization, it should be labeled with docket number 20-CV-878 (CM).

Plaintiff is cautioned that if a prisoner files an action that is dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failing to state a claim, the dismissal is a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). A prisoner who receives three "strikes" cannot file actions in forma pauperis as a prisoner, unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury, and must pay the filing fee at the time of filing any new action. --------

The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff and note service on the docket. No summons shall issue at this time. If Plaintiff complies with this order, the case shall be processed in accordance with the procedures of the Clerk's Office. If Plaintiff fails to comply with this order within the time allowed, the action will be dismissed without prejudice to Plaintiff's refiling it.

The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that appellant demonstrates good faith when seeking review of a nonfrivolous issue). SO ORDERED. Dated: February 12, 2020

New York, New York

/s/_________

COLLEEN McMAHON

Chief United States District Judge


Summaries of

Caines v. Pacheco

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Feb 12, 2020
20-CV-0878 (CM) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 12, 2020)
Case details for

Caines v. Pacheco

Case Details

Full title:KAMIEO CAINES, Plaintiff, v. SGT. PACHECO, ET AL., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Feb 12, 2020

Citations

20-CV-0878 (CM) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 12, 2020)