District Court, S.D. Ohio, 2022

Robinette v. Ross Correctional Institution

Robinette v. Ross Correctional Institution
District Court, S.D. Ohio · Decided March 22, 2022
Robinette v. Ross Correctional Institution

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION GAUGE ROBINETTE, SR., : Case No. 2:22-cv-01592 Plaintiff, □ District Judge James L. Graham - Magistrate Judge Caroline H. Gentry VS. .

ROSS CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Defendant. : DEFICIENCY ORDER Plaintiff, a prisoner at the Ross Correctional Institution, has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in connection with a civil rights complaint. (Doc. 1).

Pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA), 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)-(h), a prisoner seeking to bring a civil action without prepayment of fees or security therefor must submit an application and affidavit to proceed without prepayment of fees and a certified copy of their trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint obtained from the cashier of the prison at which the prisoner is or was confined. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). In this case, plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is incomplete. The “Certificate” page of plaintiff's application (page 8 of the Application and Affidavit By Incarcerated Person to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees form that is used in this Court, completed and signed by the institutional cashier) is blank and plaintiff has failed to provide the Court with a certified copy of his trust fund account statement as required by the PLRA.

Plaintiff is therefore ORDERED to pay $402 ($350 filing fee plus $52 administrative fee) or submit to the Court a certified copy of his prison trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the preceding six-month period within thirty (30) days.

If plaintiff fails to comply with this Order, the Court shall dismiss his case for want of prosecution. In re Prison Litigation Reform Act, 105 F.3d 1131 (6th Cir. 1997).

If plaintiff's case is dismissed for failure to comply with this Order, the case will not be reinstated to the Court’s active docket despite the payment of the filing fee. Jd.

Any motions for extension of time must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of the Deficiency Order. All motions for extension of time must be accompanied by a notarized statement or declaration complying with 28 U.S.C. § 1746 setting forth the date plaintiff placed the motion in the prison mail system and stating that first class postage was prepaid. If plaintiff does not receive the Deficiency Order within thirty (30) days, his motion for extension of time must also be accompanied by a notarized statement or declaration complying with 28 U.S.C. § 1746 setting forth the date he received the Deficiency Order.

The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to send a copy of this Deficiency Order to the cashier of the prison at which plaintiff is confined.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

March 22, 2022 s/Caroline H. Gentry Caroline H. Gentry United States Magistrate Judge

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.