Cuevas v. Psoinos

• Court: District Court, E.D. Washington
• Decided: November 8, 2023
• Docket: 2:23-cv-00243
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 FILED IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 2 Nov 08, 2023

3 SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 6 MOSES CUEVAS, No. 2:23-cv-00243-MKD 7 Plaintiff, 8 ORDER OF DISMISSAL v. WITHOUT PREJUDICE 9 DANIEL PSOINOS, ERIC 10 CARPENTER, AMDAR MOMENI, and MCKENZIE B. SIMES, 11 Defendants. 12

13 On August 24, 2023, Plaintiff filed a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant 14 to 42 U.S. C. § 1983 while housed at Eastern State Hospital. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff 15 utilized a Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint form, but it is unclear from the 16 documents presented whether Plaintiff is a civilly committed patient or a pretrial 17 detainee facing criminal charges. 18 On October 3, 2023, the Court notified Plaintiff that his status as a prisoner 19 determines whether the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996 (PLRA) governs his 20 application to proceed in forma pauperis, and instructed him that if he wished to 1 proceed with this action without prepayment of the $402.00 filing fee ($350.00 2 statutory filing fee, plus $52.00 administrative fee), then he must clarify his

3 “prisoner” status so the Court may determine whether to impose the filing fee 4 obligation under the PLRA. ECF No. 4 (citing Agyeman v. I.N.S., 296 F.3d 871, 5 885-86 (9th Cir. 2002)). The Court ordered Plaintiff to clarify his prisoner status

6 by November 2, 2023, by explaining in a letter or motion the reason for his 7 placement at the Eastern State Hospital, who authorized this placement, and under 8 what circumstances. ECF No. 4. at 2-3. The Court also directed Plaintiff to 9 include the status of any criminal charges he is currently facing, or of which he

10 has been convicted or found not guilty. Id. 11 In the alternative, Plaintiff was advised that he could pay the full $402.00 12 filing fee. Id. at 3. He was cautioned that his failure to do so by November 2,

13 2023, would result in the dismissal of this case. Id. Plaintiff did not comply with 14 these directives. 15 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:

16 1. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Federal 17 Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to comply with the Court’s Order 18 Directing Plaintiff to Clarify Prisoner Status, ECF No. 4. 19 2. The Court certifies that any appeal of this dismissal would not be

20 taken in good faith. 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter this Order, 2 enter judgment, provide a copy of this Order and the judgment to Plaintiff, and

3 close the file. 4 DATED November 8, 2023.

5 s/Mary K. Dimke MARY K. DIMKE 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19