Robinson v. Stephenson et al

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
CASE NO. 2:25-CV-12520
HON. BRANDY R. MCMILLION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
ISAIAH STEWARD ROBINSON,
Plaintiff,
vs.
GEORGE STEPHENSON, et. al.,
Defendants.
______________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER OF SUMMARY DISMISSAL
Plaintiff is an inmate currently confined at the Alger Maximum Correctional
Facility in Munising, Michigan. 	On August 19, 2025, Magistrate Judge David R.
Grand signed an order of deficiency, which required plaintiff to pay the $350.00
filing fee, plus the $55.00 administrative fee or to submit an application to proceed
in forma pauperis within thirty days of the order. See ECF No. 4. To date, Plaintiff
has neither paid the filing fee in full nor supplied this Court with the requested
information to proceed in forma pauperis. 	Consequently, for the reasons stated
below, the Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
I.
The Prisoner Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA) states that “if a prisoner
brings a civil action or files an appeal in forma pauperis, the prisoner shall be
required to pay the full amount of a filing fee.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) (as amended).
Case 2:25-cv-12520-BRM-DRG ECF No. 8, PageID.<pageID> Filed 11/03/25 Page 1 of 3

2
See also In Re Prison Litigation Reform Act, 105 F. 3d 1131, 1137 (6th Cir. 1997).
The in forma pauperis statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), does provide prisoners the
opportunity to make a “downpayment” of a partial filing fee and pay the remainder
in installments. See Boussum v. Washington, 649 F. Supp. 3d 525, 529 (E.D. Mich.
2023); reconsideration denied, 655 F. Supp. 3d 636 (E.D. Mich. 2023). Under the
PLRA, a prisoner may bring a civil action in forma pauperis if he or she files an
affidavit of indigence and a certified copy of the trust fund account statement for the
six-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint. 	See 28
U.S.C.A. § 1915(a). If the inmate does not pay the full filing fee and fails to provide
the required documents, the district court must notify the prisoner of the deficiency
and grant him or her thirty days to correct it or pay the full fee. 	See McGore v.
Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 605 (6th Cir. 1997). If the prisoner does not comply,
the district court must presume that the prisoner is not a pauper, assess the inmate
the full fee, and order the case dismissed for want of prosecution. Id.
The Court dismisses the complaint without prejudice for want of prosecution,
because of plaintiff’s failure to comply with Magistrate Judge Grand’s deficiency
order by failing to timely pay the filing fee or to provide the requested documentation
needed to proceed in forma pauperis. See Erby v. Kula, 113 F. App’x 74, 75-6 (6th
Cir. 2004); Davis v. United States, 73 F. App’x 804, 805 (6th Cir. 2003).
Case 2:25-cv-12520-BRM-DRG ECF No. 8, PageID.<pageID> Filed 11/03/25 Page 2 of 3

3
Accordingly, 	the 	Court 	DISMISSES 	WITHOUT 	PREJUDICE 	the
Complaint under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a)(1), (b)(1), (2) for failure to comply with the
filing requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. 	Nothing in this Order
precludes Plaintiff from filing a new civil rights complaint under a new case number
so long as he pays the filing and administrative fees or provides the complete and
correct information necessary to proceed without prepayment of fees.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 3, 2025 	s/Brandy R. McMillion
HON. BRANDY R. MCMILLION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:25-cv-12520-BRM-DRG ECF No. 8, PageID.<pageID> Filed 11/03/25 Page 3 of 3