Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00116/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00116-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

 “Doc.#” refers to the docket number of filings in this case.

SC

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Daniel M. Bustamante, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Officer Roman, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 08-0116-PHX-DGC (JRI)

ORDER

Plaintiff Daniel M. Bustamante has filed two motions to dismiss this case and set aside

the filing fee and sanctions. (Doc.# 6, 7.)1

 The motions will be denied. 

In his motions, Plaintiff asserts that the Court “misinterpreted [his] amended

complaint in case no. CV07-00940-PHX-DGC (JRI) as a distinct and separate action.”

(Doc.# 6.) Plaintiff states that he did not intend to bring a new case when he submitted the

Complaint in this action.

Plaintiff’s assertion that he intended the Complaint with which this action was

commenced as an amended complaint in CV 07-0940-PHX-DGC is not supported by the

record. On January 17, 2008, Plaintiff filed the “Original Complaint” in this case with an

Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis dated January 14, 2008; neither were captioned

with a case number. (Doc.# 1.) Although Plaintiff referred to CV 07-0940-PHX-DGC in the

Complaint, it was only as a “prior lawsuit” under the heading of “Previous Lawsuits.”

(Doc.# 1 at 2.) Further, while two of the Defendants in this case were also named in

Plaintiff’s previous suit, Plaintiff sued several Defendants in this case who were not named

in the earlier action. (Id. at 1, 2.) The Clerk of Court issued a Notice of Assignment the day

Case 2:08-cv-00116-DGC--JRI Document 8 Filed 06/10/08 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 2

 Plaintiff asks the Court to vacate sanctions, but he has not been sanctioned.

- 2 -

the Complaint in this case was filed clearly indicating the Complaint had been filed as a new

action. (Doc.# 2.) On March 3, 2008, the Court issued two orders, copies of which were

mailed to Plaintiff and not returned, that granted Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis

in this action without pre-payment in full of the filing fee. (Doc.# 3, 4.) The Court also

dismissed the Complaint with leave to file a first amended complaint. (Doc.# 3.) The Orders

each were captioned with the case number above. Plaintiff raised no objection. Because

Plaintiff failed to file a first amended complaint, this action was dismissed on April 21, 2008.

(Doc.# 5.) 

The facts described clearly contradict Plaintiff’s assertion that he did not intend to

commence a separate case when he filed the Complaint in this case. An indigent inmate may

proceed in forma pauperis without prepayment of the filing fee, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), (2),

but he remains obligated to pay the fee incrementally, 28 U.S.C. §1915(b)(1) (“if a prisoner

brings a civil action . . . the prisoner shall be required to pay the full amount of the filing

fee.”). That is, a prisoner-plaintiff granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis must pay the

assessed filing fee regardless of the subsequent dismissal of a case. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). 

Because the record supports that Plaintiff intended to commence a new action when he filed

his “Original Complaint” in this case, Plaintiff’s motions will be denied.2

 

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motions to dismiss case, set aside fees and sanctions

are denied. (Doc.# 6, 7.)

DATED this 10th day of June, 2008.

Case 2:08-cv-00116-DGC--JRI Document 8 Filed 06/10/08 Page 2 of 2