You're viewing Docket Item 2 from the case Karron v. United States of America. View the full docket and case details.

Download this document:




Case 1:12-cv-04521-LAP Document 2 Filed 07/25/12 Page 1 of 2



DANIEL B. KARRON,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
---------------------------------------------------------------X
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
---------------------------------------------------------------X

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Movant,

-against-

Respondent.

ORDER DIRECTING PAYMENT

OF FEE OR IFP APPLICATION &

PRISONER AUTHORIZATION

12 Civ. 4521 (LAP)

LORETTA A. PRESKA, Chief United States District Judge:

Movant files this Motion for Return of Property under Rule 41(g) of the Federal Rules of

Criminal Procedure pro se.1 The Court directs Movant to pay the $350.00 filing fee or submit a

completed Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP application”) and a Prisoner

Authorization within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order as detailed below.

In order to proceed with a civil action in this Court, Movant must pay the $350.00 filing

fee or ask the Court to waive the fee by requesting to proceed in forma pauperis with a signed

IFP application. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914, 1915. Because Movant is a prisoner, Movant is also

subject to the provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1),

(2). The PLRA requires the Court to collect the full filing fee from Movant’s prison account.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).2

1 Movant originally filed this Motion in his criminal case, United States v. Karron, No. 07
Cr. 541 (RPP). On January 5, 2012, the Honorable Robert P. Patterson, Jr. directed the Clerk of
Court to strike the Motion from the docket of that case and to open the Motion as a new civil
action assigned to his docket.

2 Although Movant styles his application as a Motion in his criminal case, the Court

construes motions under Rule 41(g) as new civil actions. See United States v. Giovanelli, 998
F.2d 116, 118-19 (2d Cir. 1993) (where criminal proceedings against movant completed, district
court should treat motion for return of seized property under Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g) [formerly
Rule 41(e)] as new civil equitable proceeding); Mora v. United States, 955 F.2d 156, 158 (2d
Cir. 1992) (same); Onwubiko v. United States, 969 F.2d 1392, 1397 (2d Cir. 1992) (same).

Case 1:12-cv-04521-LAP Document 2 Filed 07/25/12 Page 2 of 2

Movant submitted his Motion without payment of the Court’s $350.00 filing fee or an

IFP application and Prisoner Authorization.3 Therefore, Movant is directed to pay the $350.00

filing fee or, in the alternative, to submit a completed IFP application and Prisoner Authorization

to the Court within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. If Movant submits the IFP

application and Prisoner Authorization, they must bear the same docket number as this Order.4

The Clerk of Court is directed to assign this matter to my docket. No Summons shall

issue at this time. If Movant complies with this Order, if proper, the case shall be reassigned to

the Honorable Robert P. Patterson in accordance with the procedures of the Clerk’s Office. If

Movant fails to comply with this Order within the time allowed, the action will be dismissed.

The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order

would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose

of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).

SO ORDERED:

Dated: July 25, 2012

New York, New York


LORETTA A. PRESKA
Chief United States District Judge

3 The Prisoner Authorization directs the facility at which Movant is incarcerated to
deduct the filing fee from Movant’s prison account in installments and to send to this Court
certified copies of Movant’s prison account statements for the past six months. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a)(2), (b).

4 For Movant’s convenience, an IFP application and a Prisoner Authorization are

attached.

2