Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01527/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01527-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TONY EDWARD POWELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

MADDEN, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:12-cv-01527-AWI BAM

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

TO REOPEN CIVIL ACTION

(ECF No. 13)

Plaintiff TonyEdward Powell (“Plaintiff”) is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil

action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S.

388, 91 S.Ct. 1999 (1971), which provides a remedy for violation of civil rights by federal actors. 

This action was filed on September 17, 2012, and on September 21, 2012, an order issued finding

that Plaintiff is subject to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and is precluded from proceeding in forma pauperis

in this action. (ECF No. 3.) On October 5, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration, which

was denied on October 24, 2012. (ECF Nos. 4, 5.) Plaintiff filed a motion to supplement his motion

for reconsideration on October 30, 2012, and a motion regarding the order to pay the filing fee on

November 19, 2012. (ECF Nos. 6, 8.) On November 27, 2012, an order issued denying Plaintiff’s

motions and dismissing this action for failure to pay the filing fee in compliance with the court’s

order. (ECF No. 9.) On December 20, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion to reopen the proceedings. 

(ECF No. 11.) On December 26, 2012, an order issued denying Plaintiff’s motion to reopen the

proceedings. (ECF No. 12.) On December 26, 2012, Plaintiff filed a second motion to reopen this

case. (ECF. No. 13.)

1

Case 1:12-cv-01527-AWI-BAM Document 15 Filed 01/04/13 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

In his second motion to reopen the case, Plaintiff states that he now has the full filing fee and

he has sent $350 to the court. Plaintiff again requests that this action be reopened. Plaintiff was

advised in the orderissued on November 27, 2012, that this action was dismissed, without prejudice,

for refiling with the submission of the $350 filing fee. Thereafter, Plaintiff was advised in the order

issued on December 26, 2012, that if Plaintiff had raised the $350, then he could file a new action. 

The court reiterates that Plaintiff may file a new action (and not seek to reopen this action) if he

submits the required filing fee. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s second motion to reopen this case is

HEREBY DENIED. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to return any filing fee received from

Plaintiff for this action. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 4, 2013 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 1:12-cv-01527-AWI-BAM Document 15 Filed 01/04/13 Page 2 of 2