IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
September 12, 2006
JAMES HODGKINS, PLAINTIFF,
MEARL J. JUSTUS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Foreman, District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 together with a civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. However, Plaintiff has not submitted a proper certified copy of his jail trust fund account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint as required by section 1915(a)(1). Plaintiff has included a jail statement that reflects only the deposits made into his account. The court cannot make the necessary calculations to assess an initial partial filing fee pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b) without a statement showing the balances in Plaintiff's account for the last six months.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall submit, within THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of the entry of this order, a certified copy of his prison trust fund account statement for the six-monthperiod immediately preceding the filing of the complaint that includes the running balance on the account. Plaintiff is ADVISED that in the event he has been transferred among institutions during this six-month period, it is Plaintiff's responsibility to obtain a copy of his prison trust account statement from each such facility and to forward it to the Court. Plaintiff is FURTHER ADVISED that his obligation to pay the filing fee for this action was incurred at the time the action was filed; such an obligation will exist whether or not Plaintiff is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1); see also Lucien v. Jockisch, 133 F.3d 464, 467 (7th Cir. 1998).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that upon conclusion of this thirty-day period, should Plaintiff fail to comply with this order, this case will be closed for failure to comply with an order of this Court. FED.R.CIV.P. 41(b); see generally Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 1994).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
James L. Foreman DISTRICT JUDGE
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.