Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 16, 2022

Higgins v. Blinken

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-09714
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Higgins v. Blinken, Judge Swain ordered Higgins to pay filing fees or request fee waiver within 30 days.

Who this affects

Mark Rock Higgins, who was required to pay the fees or submit an application to proceed without prepayment within 30 days.

What happened

In Higgins v. Blinken, Mark Rock Higgins filed a civil action without paying the required fees or submitting an application to proceed without prepaying them.

The court ordered Higgins, within 30 days, to pay $402 or submit a signed application to proceed without prepayment. The court also said no summons would issue at that time and that the action would be dismissed if he did not comply.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied fee-waiver status for any appeal, finding that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Higgins v. Blinken · No. 1:22-cv-09714
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Nov. 16, 2022

Background

Mark Rock Higgins brought the action pro se, meaning without a lawyer. He submitted the complaint without paying the required filing and administrative fees and without submitting an application to proceed in forma pauperis, which means without prepaying court fees.

Order

The court stated that proceeding with a civil action required either payment of $402— consisting of a $350 filing fee and a $52 administrative fee—or submission of a signed application requesting permission to proceed without prepayment. The court gave Higgins 30 days from the date of the order to pay the fees or submit the application. If he submitted the application, it was to identify docket number 22-CV-9714 (LTS). The court explained that, if it granted the application, Higgins could proceed without prepaying the fees.

Effect

The court directed that no summons issue at that time. It stated that the case would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures if Higgins complied, and that the action would be dismissed if he failed to comply within the allowed time. The court also certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal. The order did not address the merits of Higgins’s claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.