Free Order - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv-00405-JJF Document 48 Filed 07/30/2008 Page1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
MICHAEL A. JOY, :
Plaintiff, Z
v. ; Civil Action No. 07-405-JJF
HEALTHCASE C.M.S. et al., Z
Defendants. ;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Raymond Blake (“Plaintiff") was a
prisoner incarcerated within the Delaware Department of
Correction at the time he filed this Complaint with other
Plaintiffs under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, along with an application to
proceed fo forma oauoeris pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915;
WHEREAS, on September 12, 2007, the Court entered an order
granting Plaintiff leave to proceed fo forma oauoeris, requiring
Plaintiff, along with the other named Plaintiffs, to pay the
$350.00 filing fee, jointly and severally, as determined by
statute (D.I. 18);
WHEREAS, on February 21, 2008, Plaintiff was dismissed from
the case for failure to submit the required authorization form
(D . I . 2 9) ;
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2008, Plaintiff filed a Motion For
Reconsideration of the February 21, 2008 dismissal order (D.I.
39);
WHEREAS, on May 28, 2008, an Order sent to Plaintiff in a

Case1:07-cv—00405-JJF Document 48 Filed 07/30/2008 Page20f2
separate case, Civ. Action No. 07-230-JJF (D.I. 29), was returned
indicating that he had been released and was no longer
incarcerated;
WHEREAS, under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, release
does not eliminate the obligation of payment of a filing fee that
could and should have been met from the trust account while
imprisonment continued. Robbins v. Switzer, 104 F.3d 895, 899
(7m Cir. 1997); seg alsg Drayer v. Attorney General, Nos. 03-
2517, 03-2518, 81 Fed. Appx. 429 (3d Cir. 2003);
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Within thirty days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff
Raymond Blake shall either pay the balance of the filing fee owed
($350.00) or shall submit a new standard form application to
proceed without prepayment of fees and affidavit so the Court may
determine whether he is still eligible to proceed in forma
pauperis.
2. Upon compliance with this Order, the Court will consider
the pending Motion For Reconsideration (D.I. 39).
NOTE: The failure of Raymond Blake to timely comply with
this Order shall result in the dismissal of his claim without
prejudice and the denial as moot of his Motion For
Reconsideration.
% ba @08
AT UNI ST ES STRICT J E
2