Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 25, 2022

Izeh v. Ross

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-08824
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Izeh v. Ross, Judge Swain ordered payment or an application to proceed without prepaying fees before the case could proceed.

Who this affects

Izeh A. Matthew, an incarcerated plaintiff representing himself, must either pay the required fees or submit a completed application to proceed without prepaying fees; the case will be dismissed if he does not comply within 30 days.

What happened

In Izeh v. Ross, Izeh A. Matthew, who is incarcerated and representing himself, filed a civil action with a prisoner authorization but without a completed application to proceed without prepaying fees.

Judge Swain gave him 30 days to either pay $402 in filing and administrative fees or submit the completed application. If approved, the $350 filing fee would be collected from his account in installments; the $52 administrative fee would not apply.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered that no summons issue yet. If Matthew complies, the Clerk’s Office will process the case; if he does not, the action will be dismissed. The court also denied fee-free status for an appeal from this order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Izeh v. Ross · No. 1:22-cv-08824
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Oct. 25, 2022

Background

Izeh A. Matthew filed this civil action while incarcerated at the Vernon C. Bain Center on Rikers Island and without a lawyer. He submitted a prisoner authorization, but he did not submit a completed application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an application to proceed in forma pauperis or IFP.

Order

The court directed Matthew, within 30 days of the order, to either pay the $402 required to file a civil action or submit the attached IFP application. The $402 consists of a $350 filing fee and a $52 administrative fee. If the court grants the IFP application, the $350 filing fee must still be collected from Matthew’s account in installments under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. The $52 administrative fee does not apply to a person granted IFP status.

Effect of the Order

No summons will issue at this time. If Matthew complies with the order, the Clerk’s Office will process the case under its usual procedures. If he does not comply within the permitted time, the action will be dismissed. The court also certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The order cautioned that certain future dismissals could count as strikes under the prisoner-filing statute, but it did not decide the merits of Matthew’s claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.