Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Bloomquist v. Cloutier N.P.

United States District Court, D. Maine

November 15, 2016

WILLIAM C. BLOOMQUIST J.D., Plaintiff
v.
CLOUTIER N.P., et al., Defendants

          ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS, GRANTING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION, and RECOMMENDING DISMlSSAL OF CERTAIN COUNTS

          John H. Rich III John H. Rich III United States Magistrate Judge

         The pro se plaintiff seeks to proceed in forma pauperis in this action and also seeks relief from my recommendation (ECF No. 4) that this case be dismissed for failure to prosecute. I grant the plaintiff's request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and his motion for reconsideration, but recommend that the court dismiss one count included in the complaint with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

         I. In Forma Pauperis

         In forma pauperis status is available under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).

         In the wake of my recommended dismissal, the plaintiff has now filed an application to proceed without paying fees or costs, signed under penalties of perjury, that states that he has an annual income of between $3, 500 and $5, 500, owns a motor vehicle valued at $2, 500, firearms valued at $2, 500, and “parts cars” valued at $2, 400. Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (ECF No. 6). He lists a debt of $3, 000. Id. I conclude that, under these circumstances, the plaintiff does qualify for in forma pauperis status, and his request is granted.

         II. Reconsideration

         On July 18, 2016, I recommended that the court dismiss this action due to the plaintiff's failure to pay the filing fee or to file an application to proceed in forma pauperis by the deadline set by my earlier June 27, 2016, order that he do so. Order (ECF No. 3); Recommended Dismissal (ECF No. 4). On the same day, the plaintiff filed a Motion for Relief from Judg[]ment and to Extend Time to File in Forma Pauperis (ECF No. 5), asserting, inter alia, that he thought that he had already filed a request for in forma pauperis status, that a case manager of this court gave him “a non[-]functioning email address for filing [his] complaint[, ]” that problems with his computer led him to believe that he had filed documents that were not in fact filed electronically, and that the first response he received from the clerk's office “seemed to confirm that[, ] except for the signature style, Plaintiff's case file was complete and ready to move forward.” Id. and letter dated August 9, 2016, from William C. Bloomquist J.D. to the clerk (ECF No. 8).

         There is as yet no judgment in this case from which the plaintiff may be relieved. Treating his motion and his objection to the recommended decision (ECF No. 7) as a motion for reconsideration of my recommended decision, I grant the motion but caution the plaintiff that he is expected to comply with all court orders and deadlines, as is the case for all litigants in this court. The recommended decision (ECF No. 4) is vacated and withdrawn.

         The matter does not end there, however.

         III. Section 1915 Review

         28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) provides, in relevant part:

         [T]he court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that (B) the action or appeal-

(i) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.