Morales v. John Doe
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:25-cv-04170
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
Morales v. John Doe: Judge Swain ordered Morales to pay fees or submit authorization before the case proceeds.
Isaac Morales, who must satisfy the court's payment or authorization requirement for the action to proceed; the case will be dismissed if he does not comply within 30 days.
What happened
In Morales v. John Doe, Isaac Morales, who is incarcerated and representing himself, asked to proceed without paying court fees upfront but did not submit the required prisoner authorization.
The court ordered Morales, within 30 days, either to pay $405 in fees or submit the authorization allowing installment deductions from his prison account. No summons will issue yet, and the action will be dismissed if he does not comply.
Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain issued the order on May 22, 2025, and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.
The detailed version
- Morales v. John Doe · No. 1:25-cv-04170
- Edgardo Ramos
- May 22, 2025
Background
Isaac Morales filed this civil action while incarcerated at EMTC Facility and is representing himself. He submitted an application for permission to proceed without prepaying court fees, but he did not submit the required prisoner authorization.
Order
The court explained that a prisoner must either pay $405 in fees—a $350 filing fee and a $55 administrative fee—or request permission to proceed without prepayment. If that request is granted, the Prison Litigation Reform Act requires the $350 filing fee to be collected in installments from the prisoner's account. The prisoner authorization permits the facility to deduct those installments and requires certified account statements for the previous six months to be sent to the court.
Within 30 days of the order, Morales must either pay the $405 or complete and submit the attached prisoner authorization, labeled with docket number 25-CV-4170 (LTS). No summons will issue at this time. If Morales complies, the Clerk's Office will process the case under its procedures; if he does not comply within the allowed time, the action will be dismissed.
Appeal and effect
The court certified that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees. The order addresses filing requirements and does not decide the claims against the defendants. It also cautioned that certain future dismissals could count as strikes under the prisoner-filing statute, but it did not make such a finding about this action.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.