Hale v. Department of Corrections et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
JAMES DEWAYNE HALE, JR., 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
v. 	) 	Case No. CIV-26-337-HE
)
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., )
)
Defendants. 	)
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff, a pro se state prisoner, has filed a civil rights complaint. (Doc. 1). He has
also filed an Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (in
forma pauperis (“IFP”)). (Doc. 2, “Application”). United States District Judge Joe Heaton
referred the matter to the undersigned Magistrate Judge for initial proceedings consistent
with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)-(C). (Doc. 5).
The filing fee in civil cases is presently $405.00.1 	Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), a
district court has discretion to permit the commencement of an action without prepayment
of fees or security therefor. 	See Grimes v. TCF Bank, 769 F. App’x 659, 660 (10th Cir.
2019) (reviewing district court order denying an IFP application for abuse of discretion);
Cabrera v. Horgas, 1999 WL 241783, at *1 (10th Cir. 1999) (“The decision to grant or
deny in forma pauperis status under § 1915 lies within the sound discretion of the trial
court.”).
1 The total filing fee includes a base fee of $350.00 and an administrative fee of $55.00.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); Judicial Conf. Sched. of Fees, Dist. Ct. Misc. Fee Sched. ¶ 14.
Case 5:26-cv-00337-HE Document 6 Filed 02/26/26 Page 1 of 3

2
Proceeding IFP “in a civil case is a privilege, not a right – fundamental or
otherwise.” White v. Colorado, 157 F.3d 1226, 1233 (10th Cir. 1998). “[T]o succeed on
a motion to proceed IFP, the movant must show a financial inability to pay the required
filing fees.” 	Lister v. Dep’t of the Treasury, 408 F.3d 1309, 1312 (10th Cir. 2005). The
court evaluates “an application to proceed [IFP] . . . in light of the applicant’s present
financial status.” Scherer v. Kansas, 263 F. App’x 667, 669 (10th Cir. 2008).
Having reviewed the Application, the undersigned finds that Plaintiff has sufficient
financial resources to pay the filing fee, as his institutional account has a current balance
of $510.55, (Doc. 2, at 3; id. at Ex. 1, at 1) and has maintained an average monthly balance
of $512.20 over the past six months (see id. at 4; id. at Ex. 1, at 2). Because he does not
qualify for authorization to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, Plaintiff’s
Application should be denied, and he should be required to pay the full filing fee for this
action to proceed.
RECOMMENDATION
For the foregoing reasons, the undersigned recommends that the court DENY
Plaintiff’s Application (Doc. 2). The undersigned further recommends that if Plaintiff does
not pay the $405.00 filing fee in full to the Clerk of the Court within 21 days of any order
adopting this Report and Recommendation, that this action be dismissed without prejudice
to the refiling. LCvR 3.3(e).
Plaintiff is advised of his right to file an objection to this Report and
Recommendation with the Clerk of this Court by March 19, 2026, in accordance with
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). 	Failure to make timely objection
Case 5:26-cv-00337-HE Document 6 Filed 02/26/26 Page 2 of 3

3
waives his right to appellate review of both factual and legal issues contained herein. See
Moore v. United States, 950 F.2d 656, 659 (10th Cir. 1991).
This Report and Recommendation disposes of all issues and terminates the referral
to the undersigned Magistrate Judge unless and until the matter is re-referred.
ENTERED this 26th day of February, 2026.
Case 5:26-cv-00337-HE Document 6 Filed 02/26/26 Page 3 of 3