Dr. Veronica Ann Williams v. Temple University and Susan M. Mundami
Dr. Veronica Ann Williams v. Temple University and Susan M. Mundami
Trial Court Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
DR. VERONICA ANN WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, No. 25cev15145 (EP) (LDW) □ MEMORANDUM ORDER TEMPLE UNIVERSITY and SUSAN M. MUNDAMI, Defendants.
PADIN, District Judge. Pro se Plaintiff Dr. Veronica Ann Williams brings a complaint against Defendants Temple University (“Temple”) and Susan M. Mundami for claims arising from her attendance of an advanced degree program at Temple. D.E. 1 (“Complaint”). Plaintiff has neither paid the applicable $350 filing fee for a civil case under
28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), nor the $55 administrative fee under Appendix K to the Local Civil Rules. Plaintiff did submit two applications to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP’’) under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). D.E. 1-1 (‘First IFP Application”); D.E. 3 (‘Second IFP Application”) (collectively, “TFP Applications”). Upon review of Plaintiff's IFP Applications, however, it appears that she has not provided all the necessary information required by the instructions set forth in the IFP Applications, which require applicants to “[c]omplete all questions in [the] application” and instruct applicants “not [to] leave any blanks: if the answer to a question is ‘0,’ ‘none,’ or ‘not applicable (N/A),’ write that response.” See First IFP Application at 1. Here, Plaintiff's IFP Applications have numerous blank entries, including her “Income amount expected next month” in Question 1 and all of Questions 6 and 7. See id.; Second IFP Application. Moreover, although
Plaintiff indicates that she has spent or intends to spend money for expenses or attorneys’ fees in conjunction with this matter, she has failed to indicate how much on the blank line provided. See First IFP Application at 5; Second IFP Application at 5. The Court is therefore “unable to determine whether Plaintiff has the ability to pay fees and costs.” Watson v. Washington Twp. of Gloucester Cty. Pub. Sch. Dist., No. 09-3650,
2009 WL 2778282, at *2 (D.N.J. Aug. 28, 2009). Additionally, the Court notes that Plaintiffs Complaint does not contain a signature. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1 1(a), “[e|very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney’s name—or by a party personally if the party is unrepresented.” Accordingly, IT IS, on this 30" day of October 2025, ORDERED that Plaintiff’s IFP Application, D.E. 1-1, is DENIED without prejudice; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this action due to Plaintiff's failure to satisfy the filing fee requirement or alternatively submit a properly completed IFP application; and it is further ORDERED that if Plaintiff wishes to reopen this action she shall either, within 30 days of entry of this Order: (1) pay the $405 civil filing and administrative fees, pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) and Appendix K to the Local Civil Rules; or (2) submit a properly completed IFP application on Form AO 239, available at https://www.njd.uscourts.gov/sites/njd/files/forms/AO- 239.pdf; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall send Plaintiff a blank Form AO 239 by regular mail; and it is further
ORDERED that if Plaintiff wishes to reopen this action she shall also, within 30 days of entry of this Order, file an amended complaint that contains her signature; and it is finally ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall send a copy of this Order to Plaintiff by regular mail.
Evelyn Padin, U.S.D.J.
Reference
- Status
- Unknown