Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 24, 2023

Clanton v. blinken

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-04284
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Clanton v. Blinken, Judge Swain ordered the pro se plaintiff to pay $402 or request fee-free status within 30 days.

Who this affects

Stanford Charles Clanton, who was required to pay the $402 fee or submit an IFP application within 30 days; the underlying defendants were not affected by a merits ruling in this order.

What happened

In Clanton v. Blinken, Stanford Charles Clanton filed a civil action without paying the required fees or submitting an application to proceed without prepaying them.

The court ordered Clanton, within 30 days, either to pay $402 in filing and administrative fees or submit the attached application. No summons would issue at that time, and the action would be dismissed if he did not comply.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also denied fee-free status for any appeal from this order, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

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

Case
Clanton v. blinken · No. 1:23-cv-04284
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
May 24, 2023

Background

Stanford Charles Clanton brought this civil action pro se, meaning without a lawyer. He submitted the complaint without paying the required fees and without submitting an application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an IFP application.

Order

The court explained that proceeding with a civil action required either paying $402—consisting of a $350 filing fee and a $52 administrative fee—or submitting a signed IFP application. The court gave Clanton 30 days from the date of the order to take one of those actions. If the court granted the IFP application, Clanton would be allowed to proceed without prepaying the fees.

No summons would issue at that time. The court stated that, if Clanton complied, the case would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures; if he failed to comply within the allowed time, the action would be dismissed.

Appeal-related ruling

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal.

Disposition

Judge Laura Taylor Swain entered an order directing payment of the fee or submission of an IFP application. The opinion did not decide the underlying 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.