ROCHE
v.
LARC, INC.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Pro se plaintiff Richard Roche filed a complaint but failed to pay the required filing fee or submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis within the court's deadline. The district court dismissed the complaint without prejudice for non-compliance with filing requirements.
Yes. The district court properly dismissed the complaint without prejudice for failure to contemporaneously pay the filing fee or move in forma pauperis, consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 1914(c) and applicable case law.
“allowing a litigant to commence a civil action without prepayment of the filing fee if the litigant submits an affidavit showing they are unable to pay”
Describes the in forma pauperis mechanism available under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 for litigants unable to afford filing fees
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Richard Roche, a non-incarcerated pro se litigant, filed a complaint in the Middle District of Florida. The court ordered Plaintiff to eithe…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Filing Fee Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
Before the Court is pro se Plaintiff Richard Roche's Complaint. (Doc. 1). The Court Ordered Plaintiff to pay the filing fee or move to proceed in forma pauperis by January 17, 2025. (Doc. 4). Plaintiff (who is not in custody) has yet to pay the filing fee or move to proceed without prepayment of costs. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (allowing a litigant to commence a civil action without prepayment of the filing fee if the litigant submits an affidavit showing they are unable to pay). The Court thus dismisses this action without prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(c) (“Each district court by rule or standing order may require advance payment of fees."); Local Rule 1.05(c) (“The clerk must accept an initial paper from a person in custody even if no filing fee or motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis accompanies the paper." (emphasis added)); Myers v. City of Naples, Fla., No. 23-13073, 2024 WL 4691100, at *2 (11th Cir. Nov. 6, 2024) (affirming the dismissal of an unrepresented, non-prisoner litigant's complaint for failure to contemporaneously pay the filing fee or move in forma pauperis). If Plaintiff wants to proceed with his claims, he may file another complaint under a separate case number that is accompanied by the required filing fee or a signed long-form application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs (available at www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/ao239_1.pdf).
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1. The Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. 2. The Clerk is DIRECTED to deny any pending motions as moot, terminate any deadlines, and close the case.
DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on March 14, 2025.