IN RE: PATRICK J. MCCLINE, SR. v. KELLY

CourtDistrict Court, D. New Jersey
DecidedAugust 4, 2025
Docket2:25-cv-01709
StatusUnknown

This text of IN RE: PATRICK J. MCCLINE, SR. v. KELLY (IN RE: PATRICK J. MCCLINE, SR. v. KELLY) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
IN RE: PATRICK J. MCCLINE, SR. v. KELLY, (D.N.J. 2025).

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

_________________________________ : PATRICK J. MCCLINE, SR., : : Plaintiff, : Civ. No. 25-1709 (JKS) (JRA) : v. : : MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER WARDEN MICHAEL KELLY, : : Defendant. : August 4, 2025 _________________________________:

SEMPER, District Judge

Plaintiff Patrick J. McCline, Sr. (“Plaintiff”) is an inmate confined at the Atlantic County Justice Facility in Mays Landing, New Jersey. He initiated this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against multiple Defendants based on alleged unconstitutional conduct, including complaints of the conditions of confinement, failure to protect, inadequate medical care, and retaliation. (See ECF Nos. 1–39.) Since submitting his original complaint, Plaintiff has filed over thirty letters and two amended complaints seeking to add new claims and defendants. (See ECF No. 5–38.) As explained below, this matter will be administratively terminated for the following reasons: (1) Plaintiff has neither paid the $405.00 filing and administrative fees nor submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis; (2) Plaintiff failed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15, which governs amended and supplemental pleadings; and (3) Plaintiff failed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, which requires “a short and plain statement of the claim.” As a civil action, Plaintiff’s complaint is subject to the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The entire fee to be paid in advance of filing a civil complaint is $405.00. That includes a filing fee of $350.00 plus an administrative fee of $55.00. A prisoner may alternatively apply to proceed in forma pauperis if he is unable to pay the fee. If a court grants in forma pauperis status, a

prisoner will, instead, be assessed a filing fee of $350.00, to be paid in installments, and will not be responsible for the $55.00 administrative fee. If a court denies in forma pauperis status, the prisoner must pay the full $405.00, including the $350.00 filing fee and the $55.00 administrative fee, before the complaint will be filed. If a court grants in forma pauperis status, the prisoner must pay the full amount of the $350.00 filing fee as follows. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). First, the court shall assess and, when funds exist, collect, an initial partial filing fee of twenty percent of the greater of (i) the average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account or (ii) the average monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint. Id. After payment of the initial partial filing fee, in each month that the amount in the prisoner’s account exceeds $10.00,

until the $350.00 filing fee is paid, the agency having custody of the prisoner shall assess, deduct from the prisoner’s account, and forward to the Clerk of the Court, payment equal to twenty percent of the preceding month’s income credited to the prisoner’s account. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”) of 1995, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e, which amends 28 U.S.C. § 1915, establishes certain financial requirements for prisoners who attempt to bring a civil action in forma pauperis. Under the PLRA, a prisoner bringing a civil action in forma pauperis must submit an affidavit, including a statement of all assets, which states that the prisoner is unable to pay the fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). The prisoner also must submit a certified copy of his inmate trust fund account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of his complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). The prisoner must obtain this statement from the appropriate official of each prison at which he was or is confined. Id. Under the PLRA, even if the full filing fee, or any part of it, has been paid, the Court must dismiss the case if it finds that the action is: (1) frivolous or malicious; (2) fails to state a claim

upon which relief may be granted; or (3) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). If the Court dismisses the case for any of these reasons, the PLRA does not permit the prisoner to get his filing fee back. Moreover, if the prisoner has, on three or more prior occasions while incarcerated, brought an action or appeal in a court that was dismissed on any of the grounds listed above, he cannot bring another action in forma pauperis unless he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Furthermore, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 permits a party to amend its pleading once within 21 days after service. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). “In all other cases, a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave.” Id. A court may permit a party to supplement its pleading “[o]n motion and reasonable notice.” Fed. R. Civ. P.

15(d). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 provides that a pleading stating a claim for relief must include “a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction,” “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,” and “a demand for the relief sought.” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). “Each allegation must be simple, concise, and direct.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(d). The allegation must “give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff filed more than thirty letters that could be construed as attempts to supplement his pleading to add claims and defendants. However, Plaintiff did not first file a motion or provide “reasonable notice,” as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(d). He also submitted two amended complaints without obtaining leave of court. (See ECF No. 5–38.) Such piecemeal efforts to amend or supplement the complaint are improper. See Lewis v. Sessions, No.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Erickson v. Pardus
551 U.S. 89 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 2007)
DaSilva v. Sheriff's Department
413 F. App'x 498 (Third Circuit, 2011)
Robert Jenkins v. Superintendent Laurel Highland
705 F.3d 80 (Third Circuit, 2013)
Lisa Papotto v. Hartford Life & Accident Insur
731 F.3d 265 (Third Circuit, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
IN RE: PATRICK J. MCCLINE, SR. v. KELLY, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-patrick-j-mccline-sr-v-kelly-njd-2025.