Finnell v. Roberson et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
KYLE FINNELL,
Plaintiff,
vs.
ROBERSON, et al.,
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Case No. 2:25-cv-1421
Judge Douglas R. Cole
Chief Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman
ORDER
Plaintiff, a prisoner incarcerated at the Madison Correctional Institution in London, Ohio,
has submitted a pro se civil rights complaint in this case. (Doc. 1-1). The Court issued a
Deficiency Order because plaintiff’s initial motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis was
incomplete. (See Docs. 1, 2). Plaintiff then filed a second motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, (Doc. 3), as well as a motion to waive filing fees, (Doc. 4).
As an initial matter, plaintiff asks the Court to waive filing fees in this action on the basis
that he has filed multiple other civil lawsuits in this Court and the collection of all filing fees
simultaneously leaves him with “no income for postage, copying, paper, envelopes, writing
utensils, etc. . .” (Doc. 4, at PageID 51-52). However, “[u]nder the [Prison Litigation Reform
Act] PLRA, ‘federal courts may not waive or reduce the filing fee for an indigent prisoner
proceeding IFP. § 1915(b)(1). Instead, the statute provides that a prisoner proceeding IFP ‘shall
be required to pay the full amount of a filing fee,’ and instructs courts to deduct the fee in
installments from the prisoner’s account.’” Reed v. Christiansen, No. 25-cv-10358, 2026 WL
678410, at *2 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 10, 2026) (quoting Johnson v. High Desert State Prison, 146 S.
Case: 2:25-cv-01421-DRC-SKB Doc #: 6 Filed: 10/08/26 Page: 1 of 4 PAGEID #: <pageID>

2
Ct. 793, 794 (2026) (Sotomayor, J., with Jackson, J., dissenting)). “If filing fees were suspended
because of perceived hardship, the Congressional action [in passing the PLRA] would not have
its intended effect of discouraging frivolous lawsuits by making prisoners pay at least some of
the cost of litigating those cases.” Johnson v. Adult Parole Auth., No. 3:16-CV-141, 2016 WL
1626111, at *1 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 25, 2016). See also Patterson v. Mackie, No. 13-15149, 2014
WL 1478437, at *1 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 15, 2014) (noting that under the PLRA, the moment a
prisoner files his complaint with the Court, he becomes “responsible for the filing fee” and
“waive[s] any objection to the withdrawal of funds from his trust fund account to pay court fees
and costs”). Plaintiff’s motion to waive collection of the filing fee, (Doc. 4), is therefore
DENIED.
The Court hereby GRANTS plaintiff’s second motion to proceed in forma pauperis,
(Doc. 3). It is ORDERED that plaintiff be allowed to prosecute this action without prepayment
of fees or costs and that judicial officers who render services in this action shall do so as if the
costs had been prepaid. Plaintiff’s initial application to proceed in forma pauperis, (Doc. 1), is
DENIED as moot.
Plaintiff is required to pay the full amount of the Court’s $350 filing fee. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(b)(1); 28 U.S.C. § 1914. Because he is permitted to proceed in forma pauperis, plaintiff
is not required to pay the Court’s $55 administrative fee. See Judicial Conference Schedule of
Fees, No. 14 (issued in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1914), available at https://www.uscourts.
gov/court-programs/fees/district-court-miscellaneous-fee-schedule (accessed February 12, 2026).
Plaintiff’s Application, however, reflects that that he does not have sufficient funds to pay the
entire filing fee in full at this time.
Case: 2:25-cv-01421-DRC-SKB Doc #: 6 Filed: 10/08/26 Page: 2 of 4 PAGEID #: <pageID>

3
In accordance with section 804(a)(3) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 28
U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), plaintiff must pay an initial partial filing fee of 20 percent of the greater of
the average monthly deposits to his prison account or the average monthly balance in his account
for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint. After payment of the
initial partial filing fee, plaintiff is further required to make monthly payments of 20 percent of
the preceding month’s income credited to his prison account until he pays the full amount of the
$350 filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).
The custodian of plaintiff’s inmate trust account at the institution of his residence is
therefore DIRECTED to submit to the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Ohio as an initial partial payment, 20% of the greater of:
(a) the average monthly deposits to the inmate trust account; or
(b) the average monthly balance in the inmate trust account, for the six months
immediately preceding the filing of the Complaint.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). If plaintiff does not currently possess the funds to pay the initial filing
fee, the amount assessed shall be collected from plaintiff’s account when such funds become
available. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4). Even if the account balance is less than $10, the custodian
must still forward payments to the Clerk of Court to pay the initial filing fee.
Once the initial partial filing fee is paid, the custodian shall submit 20% of the inmate’s
preceding monthly income credited to the account if, during that month, the balance of that
account exceeds $10, until the full fee of $350 has been paid. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2); see
McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601 (6th Cir. 1997). If plaintiff is transferred to another
institution, the current custodian should forward this Order to that institution so that the new
Case: 2:25-cv-01421-DRC-SKB Doc #: 6 Filed: 10/08/26 Page: 3 of 4 PAGEID #: <pageID>

4
custodian of plaintiff’s account can collect and remit the monthly partial payment. Checks are to
be made payable to “Clerk, U.S. District Court” and sent to:
Prisoner Accounts Receivable
121 Joseph P. Kinneary U.S. Courthouse
85 Marconi Blvd.
Columbus, Ohio 43215
The prisoner’s name and this case number must be included on each remittance.
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to mail a copy of this Order to plaintiff and the
prison cashier’s office.
The next step in this case is an initial screening of plaintiff’s Complaint, which is
required because plaintiff is a prisoner seeking “redress from a governmental entity or officer or
employee of a governmental entity,” and is proceeding in forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C. §1915A(a);
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The Undersigned will conduct this initial screening as soon as
practicable. The Court will then enter an appropriate order and, if appropriate, direct service of
the Complaint and summons on defendants. The Court will consider any pending motions after,
or along with, the initial screening.
Plaintiff is reminded that he must keep this Court informed of his current address, and
promptly file a Notice of New Address if he is released or transferred.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
October 8, 2026 	/s/Stephanie K. Bowman
Stephanie K. Bowman
Chief United States Magistrate Judge
Case: 2:25-cv-01421-DRC-SKB Doc #: 6 Filed: 10/08/26 Page: 4 of 4 PAGEID #: <pageID>