Summary
This Memorandum and Order from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri denies the self-represented plaintiff’s third application to proceed in forma pauperis due to incomplete financial disclosures and a future-dated signature. The court further dismisses the underlying civil action without prejudice because the plaintiff failed to pay the mandatory filing fee within the timeframe ordered by the judge. The order concludes by certifying that any appeal from the dismissal would not be taken in good faith.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether plaintiff qualifies for in forma pauperis status under 28 U.S.C. §1915(a)(1).
- Whether the district court may dismiss the action for plaintiff’s failure to comply with the fee order.
Holdings
- The plaintiff does not qualify because his application was incomplete and he failed to demonstrate inability to pay.
- The court may dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee and failure to submit a complete in forma pauperis application.
Key quotations
“Proceeding without prepayment of fees and costs, or in forma pauperis, is a matter of privilege, not of right.”
“The Court will therefore dismiss this action, without prejudice, due to Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s July 1, July 15, and August 19, 2025 Orders and his failure to prosecute his case.”
Factual background
Self‑represented plaintiff Matthew W. Miller sued James Granger et al. and repeatedly applied for in forma pauperis status. Each application was denied because the plaintiff failed to provide complete financial information and did not pay the required filing fee despite a court order.
Procedural history
Plaintiff filed three applications for in forma pauperis. The first was denied on July 1, 2025; the second denied on August 19, 2025 after being incomplete; the third, filed September 10, 2025, was also incomplete and filed after the deadline. The court ordered dismissal without prejudice.