Opinion
Civil Action 3:21-cv-01190
09-13-2021
ROBERT WEAD, #FM2131, Plaintiff, v. JULIUS KARIUKI, Nurse, SCI Camp Hill, Defendant.
BRANN, C.J.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
JOSEPH F. SAPORITO, JR. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This is a federal civil rights action by a convicted state prisoner. On July 7, 2021, the Court received and lodged a pro se complaint submitted by the plaintiff, Robert Wead. (Doc. 1.) The complaint was accompanied by an application to proceed in forma pauperis, signed by the plaintiff on June 24, 2021, and a copy of the plaintiff's certified inmate account statement, as is required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). (Doc. 2; Doc. 3.)
We note that the complaint is neither signed nor dated.
On July 12, 2021, we denied the in forma pauperis motion because the plaintiff's certified inmate account statement indicated that he had access to sufficient financial resources to pay the requisite filing and administrative fees. (Doc. 6.) We further ordered that the plaintiff pay the requisite $402 filing and administrative fees within thirty days. (Id.) On August 18, 2021, we granted the plaintiff's timely motion for an extension of time until September 6, 2021, to pay the fee. (Doc. 10.)
Now, more than a week after that extended deadline expired, the plaintiff has not paid the required $402.00 filing and administrative fees to the Clerk of Court. Accordingly, we recommend that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to pay the requisite filing and administrative fees and that the Clerk be directed to administratively close this case. See Lindsey v. Roman, 408 Fed.Appx. 530, 532-33 (3d Cir. 2010) (per curiam); Parker v. Harrisburg City, Civil No. 1:17-CV-00653, 2017 WL 3015880, at *2 (M.D. Pa. June 7, 2017), report and recommendation adopted by 2017 WL 3008583 (M.D. Pa. July 14, 2017).
NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the undersigned has entered the foregoing Report and Recommendation dated September 13, 2021. Any party may obtain a review of the Report and Recommendation pursuant to Local Rule 72.3, which provides:
Any party may object to a magistrate judge's proposed findings, recommendations or report addressing a motion or matter described in 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) or making a recommendation for the disposition of a prisoner case or a habeas corpus petition within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Such party shall file with the clerk of court, and serve on the magistrate judge and all parties, written objections which shall specifically identify the portions of the proposed findings, recommendations or report to which objection is made and the basis for such objections. The briefing requirements set forth in Local Rule 72.2 shall apply. A judge shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified
proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. The judge, however, need conduct a new hearing only in his or her discretion or where required by law, and may consider the record developed before the magistrate judge, making his or her own determination on the basis of that record. The judge may also receive further evidence, recall witnesses or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.
Failure to file timely objections to the foregoing Report and Recommendation may constitute a waiver of any appellate rights.