Holmes v. Minnesota DOC

Nature of the order

This was a procedural order addressing Holmes’s filing-fee application, service of process, defendants’ response deadlines, and his request for appointed counsel. It did not decide the underlying claims.

Rulings and requirements

- Proceeding without prepaying the full filing fee: The court granted Stephan Nicholas Holmes’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning he may proceed without paying the entire filing fee before the case continues. He must still pay the unpaid balance of the statutory filing fee, stated as $298.18, through the payment process required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The clerk must notify the authorities at the institution where Holmes is confined. - Service forms: Holmes must complete and return a Marshal Service Form, Form USM-285, for each defendant. The court will provide the forms. If he does not return them by February 1, 2024, the court may recommend dismissal of the matter without prejudice for failure to prosecute. - Service waivers and service costs: After receiving the completed forms, the clerk must seek waivers of service from defendants sued in their personal capacities under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d). A personal-capacity defendant who fails to return a waiver within 30 days after it is mailed, without good cause, will be required to pay later expenses incurred to complete service. - Responses to the complaint: Individual-capacity defendants who are properly served or waive service must file an answer or another permitted response within the deadlines established by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(1). Official-capacity defendants who have already been served must file an answer or another response by January 23, 2024. Those defendants may reasonably request an extension so that they can file a joint response on the same schedule as the individual-capacity defendants. - Appointment of counsel: The court denied Holmes’s motion for appointment of counsel. It explained that a self-represented litigant does not have an automatic statutory or constitutional right to appointed counsel in a civil case. The court found that Holmes had presented his claims with reasonable clarity and that, at this early stage, it could not determine that the factual or legal issues were too complex for him to pursue without a lawyer. The court stated that it would reconsider appointment of counsel without requiring a new motion if circumstances changed and appointment appeared appropriate.

Judge and disposition

The order was signed by Dulce J. Foster, United States Magistrate Judge. The application to proceed without prepaying the full fee was granted, and the motion for appointment of counsel was denied. The remaining provisions established service, fee-payment, and response procedures.