Jones v. Rankins et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
DAJUAN JONES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. CIV-26-789-G
)
FNU RANKINS, et al., )
)
Defendant. )
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff DaJuan Jones, proceeding pro se, brings suit alleging violations of his civil
rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. United States District Judge Charles B. Goodwin referred
this matter to the undersigned Magistrate Judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1)(B)-(C). Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s Amended Application for
Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”). Doc. 6 (“Amended Application”).1 For the
reasons set forth below, the undersigned recommends that the Court deny Plaintiff’s
Amended Application.
I. Analysis
Courts have discretion in deciding whether to grant a civil litigant permission to
proceed IFP. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a); Lister v. Dep’t of Treasury, 408 F.3d 1309, 1312 (10th
Cir. 2005). “To succeed on a motion to proceed IFP, the movant must show a financial
inability to pay the required filing fees.” Lister, 408 F.3d at 1312 (citation modified). After
1 The undersigned considers only Plaintiff’s Amended Application, the filing of which
mooted Plaintiff’s original Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying
Fees or Costs. Doc. 2.
Case 5:26-cv-00789-G Document 7 Filed 04/30/26 Page 1 of 3

2
considering the Amended Application, the undersigned finds Plaintiff has not shown a
financial inability to pay the required filing fees.
When an action is commenced, a plaintiff must pay a filing fee or the action may be
subject to dismissal without prejudice. LCvR3.2; 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). The required filing
fee for a civil rights action, such as the one brought by Plaintiff, is $405.00.2 The financial
information included with the Amended Application shows Plaintiff has a current account
balance of $549.05. Doc. 6 at 2; Doc. 6-1 at 1. Additionally, the undersigned calculates
Plaintiff’s average account balance over the last six months as $569.46. See Doc. 6-1 at 1.
Because Plaintiff has more than $405.00 in his institutional account(s), he has the
funds necessary to pay the required $405.00 filing fee.3 Accordingly, the undersigned finds
that Plaintiff has not established an inability to pay the filing fee and, as such, cannot
succeed on his applications to proceed IFP. See Lister, 408 F.3d at 1312 (stating that a
litigant “must show a financial inability to pay the required filing fees” to proceed IFP); 28
U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) (stating that a court may grant a litigant the ability to proceed in a civil
case without the prepayment of fees if the litigant establishes that he “is unable to pay such
fees”); see also Lay v. Okla. Dep’t of Corr., 746 F. App’x 777, 779 (10th Cir. 2018)
2 The total filing fee includes (1) a base fee of $350.00 and (2) an administrative fee of
$55.00 for any person not granted IFP status. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); Judicial Conf.
Sched. of Fees, Dist. Ct. Misc. Fee Sched. ¶ 14.
3 Under Oklahoma law, funds in a prisoner’s mandatory savings account may be used to
pay the costs of federal filing fees. Okla. Stat. tit. 57, § 549(A)(5); see also Todd v. Att’y
Gen. of Okla., 377 F. App’x 832, 834 (10th Cir. 2010) (“Under Oklahoma law, . . . funds
[in an inmate’s mandatory savings account] may be used to pay the costs of federal filing
fees.” (citing § 549(A)(5))).
Case 5:26-cv-00789-G Document 7 Filed 04/30/26 Page 2 of 3

3
(holding a district court did not abuse its discretion in denying IFP when a “[prisoner’s]
inmate-savings statement reflected a $550.67 balance” as “that balance sufficed to prepay
the $400 district court filing fee” (citation modified)).
II. Recommendation and Notice of Right to Object
For the preceding reasons, the undersigned recommends that the Court DENY
Plaintiff’s Amended Application. Doc. 6. The undersigned further recommends that the
Court dismiss this action without prejudice to refiling unless Plaintiff pays the full filing
fee of $405.00 within 21 days of any order adopting this Report and Recommendation. See
LCvR3.3(e).
Plaintiff is advised of his right to object to this Report and Recommendation. See
28 U.S.C. § 636. Any objection must be filed with the Clerk of Court not later than May 21,
2026. See id. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Failure to object timely waives the
right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues addressed in this Report and
Recommendation. See Moore v. United States, 950 F.2d 656, 659 (10th Cir. 1991).
This Report and Recommendation disposes of all issues referred to the undersigned
Magistrate Judge in this matter.
ENTERED this 30th day of April, 2026.
Case 5:26-cv-00789-G Document 7 Filed 04/30/26 Page 3 of 3