Marraksh, Abu Talib Al v. O'Donnell, Cindy

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Wisconsin
DecidedAugust 18, 2022
Docket3:22-cv-00279
StatusUnknown

This text of Marraksh, Abu Talib Al v. O'Donnell, Cindy (Marraksh, Abu Talib Al v. O'Donnell, Cindy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Wisconsin primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Marraksh, Abu Talib Al v. O'Donnell, Cindy, (W.D. Wis. 2022).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

ABU TALIB AL MARRAKSH,

Plaintiff, ORDER v. Case No. 22-cv-279-jdp CINDY O'DONNELL, et al,

Defendants.

Plaintiff Abu Talib Al Marraksh seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this case. This court has previously recorded three “strikes” against plaintiff under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) which would disqualify him from obtaining in forma pauperis status unless he alleged that he was in imminent danger of serious physical harm. See Case Nos. 05-cv-635-jcs, 07-cv-655-bbc, and 10-cv-308-bbc. But the strikes assessed in those cases are no longer valid after the court of appeals’ decision in Turley v. Gaetz, 625 F.3d 1005, 1012 (7th Cir. 2010), concluding that a plaintiff’s entire case must be dismissed under the grounds listed in § 1915(g). So, the court will not apply § 1915(g) to plaintiff’s claims. Nevertheless, before this court may decide whether plaintiff may proceed with his claims, he will have to make an initial partial payment of the filing fee as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). Plaintiff has submitted a certified inmate trust fund account statement for the six month period preceding the complaint in support of the pending motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee. Accordingly, the court must determine whether plaintiff qualifies for indigent status and, if so, calculate an initial partial payment of the $350.00 fee for filing this case. Even when an inmate litigant qualifies for indigent status, the litigant must pay a portion of the fee returned by the formula set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Using information for the relevant period from plaintiff’s trust fund account statement, I calculate

plaintiff’s initial partial filing fee to be $4.22. For this case to proceed, plaintiff must submit this amount on or before September 8, 2022. If plaintiff does not have enough money to make the initial partial payment from plaintiff’s regular account, plaintiff should arrange with prison authorities to pay the remainder from plaintiff’s release account. ORDER IT IS ORDERED that, 1. Plaintiff Abu Talib Al Marraksh is assessed $4.22 as an initial partial payment of the $350.00 fee for filing this case. Plaintiff is to submit a check or money order made

payable to the clerk of court in the amount of $4.22 or advise the court in writing why plaintiff is not able to submit the assessed amount on or before September 8, 2022. 2. If, by September 8, 2022, plaintiff fails to make the initial partial payment or show cause for failure to do so, plaintiff will be held to have withdrawn this action voluntarily and the case will be closed without prejudice to plaintiff filing this case at a later date. 3. No further action will be taken in this case until the clerk’s office receives plaintiff’s initial partial filing fee as directed above and the court has screened the complaint as required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Once the screening

process is complete, a separate order will issue. Entered this 18th day of August, 2022.

BY THE COURT:

/s/

STEPHEN L. CROCKER Magistrate Judge

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

Related

Turley v. Gaetz
625 F.3d 1005 (Seventh Circuit, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Marraksh, Abu Talib Al v. O'Donnell, Cindy, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marraksh-abu-talib-al-v-odonnell-cindy-wiwd-2022.