SATCHER v. ARMSTEAD ( 2021 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA NAIM SATCHER, : Plaintiff, : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 21-CV-0919 : POLICE OFFICER ARMSTEAD, et al., : Defendants. : ORDER AND NOW, this 20th day of May, 2021, upon consideration of Plaintiff Naim Satcher’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. Nos. 1 & 6), Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement (Doc. No. 5), and pro se Complaint (Doc. No. 2), it is ORDERED that: 1. Leave to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. 2. Naim Satcher, #MP-2256, shall pay the full filing fee of $350 in installments, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b), regardless of the outcome of this case. The Court directs the Superintendent of SCI-Phoenix or other appropriate official to assess an initial filing fee of 20% of the greater of (a) the average monthly deposits to Satcher’s inmate account; or (b) the average monthly balance in Satcher’s inmate account for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of this case. The Superintendent of SCI-Phoenix or other appropriate official shall calculate, collect, and forward the initial payment assessed pursuant to this Order to the Court with a reference to the docket number for this case. In each succeeding month when the amount in Satcher’s inmate trust fund account exceeds $10.00, the Superintendent of SCI-Phoenix or other appropriate official shall forward payments to the Clerk of Court equaling 20% of the preceding month’s income credited to Satcher’s inmate account until the fees are paid. Each payment shall refer to the docket number for this case. 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to SEND a copy of this Order to the Superintendent of SCI-Phoenix. 4. The Complaint is DEEMED filed. 5. All claims against Defendant Assistant District Attorney Marcos Long are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum. 6. The balance of Satcher’s claims are STAYED AND PLACED IN SUSPENSE, pursuant to the abstention doctrine of Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), pending resolution of Satcher’s criminal case. Following resolution of his criminal case, Satcher may file a motion to reopen this matter. BY THE COURT: /s/ Karen Spencer Marston KAREN SPENCER MARSTON, J.