PLRA’s filing fee requirements compel inmates to consider the economic incentives, weigh the costs of litigation, and “stop and think” before filing suit
How later courts described this case
- PLRA’s filing fee requirements compel inmates to consider the economic incentives, weigh the costs of litigation, and “stop and think” before filing suit
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PITTSBURGH DIVISION
GERMAN BURMUDEZ-RODRIGUEZ, )
)
) 2:25-CV-00590-CBB
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
DOCTOR CHANG, NURSE
)
PRACTITIONER MUSILLI, NURSE
)
PRACTITIONER FETTERMAN,
)
)
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiff German Burmudez-Rodriguez filed his complaint and thereafter a
motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) which the Court granted. ECF Nos. 1,
5, 7. In his motion to proceed IFP, Plaintiff submitted a signed Prisoner
Authorization Form indicating that Plaintiff agreed to pay the filing fee in full. ECF
No. 5-1. Before service of his complaint, Plaintiff filed a motion to voluntarily
withdraw his complaint because he had retained counsel and wanted to withdraw
the complaint to “enable counsel to enter his appearance and file a counseled
complaint.” ECF No. 9 at 1. The Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to withdraw his
complaint and deemed the action voluntarily dismissed without prejudice under
Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(1)(i). ECF No. 10. Since voluntarily withdrawing his
action, Plaintiff has made two partial payments of the filing fee for $7.86 and $1.10,
respectively. ECF Nos. 11, 12. Plaintiff now seeks to stop any further deductions
from his prisoner account because he withdrew the action and filed the present
motion to discontinue the partial payments of the filing fee. ECF No. 13.
A prisoner like Plaintiff who brings a civil lawsuit and seeks to proceed IFP
under the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”) must “pay the full amount of a
filing fee.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Prisoners who obtain IFP status under the PLRA
are not entitled to a waiver of filing fees and instead required to pay the filing fees
in installments when there are sufficient funds in his prison account. Id. While the
Court is sympathetic, it does not have the statutory authority to waive an inmate’s
not-yet-paid filing fees or to refund any portion of the filing fees once the action is
filed. Bookwalter v. Keen, No. 1:CV-15-1291, 2015 WL 7294462, at *1 (M.D. Pa. Nov.
19, 2015). See also Porter v. Dep't of Treasury, 564 F.3d 176, 180 (3d Cir. 2009) (“It
is of no consequence whether an appeal is voluntarily dismissed, dismissed due to a
jurisdictional defect, or dismissed on the merits – appellants are not entitled to the
return of their filing and docketing fees.”); Muhammad v. U.S. Marshals Serv., 385
F. App'x 70, 73 (3d Cir. 2010) (PLRA’s filing fee requirements compel inmates to
consider the economic incentives, weigh the costs of litigation, and “stop and think”
before filing suit). Therefore, the Court is unable to waive Plaintiff’s not-yet-paid
filing fees. To the extent Plaintiff wishes to reopen this litigation, he may file a
motion to reopen his case with the Court.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Discontinue Partial
Payments is DENIED.
SO ORDERED this 1st day of October, 2025.
BY THE COURT:
s/Christopher B. Brown
United States Magistrate Judge
cc: GERMAN BURMUDEZ-RODRIGUEZ
MY-5571
SCI GREENE
169 PROGRESS DRIVE
WAYNESBURG, PA 15370