Marner v. U.S. Department of the Air Force

District Court, S.D. California · 3:24-cv-00502 · 2025-09-02 · Unknown

Proceeding: district
Area: civil
Panel: Ruth Bermudez Montenegro (author)

Analysis

A model's reading — qwen3.8-27b, prompt own-v1, 2026-10-13T20:55Z · confidence high

The court reviewed a complaint filed by pro se plaintiff Zachary Marner that failed to include the required filing fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The court dismissed the action without prejudice and ordered the Clerk to close the case, allowing the plaintiff to reopen it by September 25, 2025, if the fee is paid or an IFP application is filed.

What the court decided	The model
Dismissal of the civil action without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis. “Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to satisfy the filing and administrative fee requirements or file an application to proceed IFP.”	agree with court The dismissal is procedurally correct. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), a civil action in district court requires a filing fee. If the fee is not paid, the plaintiff must file an application to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The order recites that the plaintiff did neither. Dismissal without prejudice is the standard remedy for this procedural defect, allowing the plaintiff to cure the deficiency and refile.
Ordering the Clerk of the Court to close the case. “The Court ORDERS the Clerk of the Court to close the case.”	agree with court Closing the case is the appropriate administrative step following a dismissal without prejudice for failure to pay fees, particularly when a specific deadline to reopen is provided.

What the court decided

The model

Dismissal of the civil action without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis.

“Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to satisfy the filing and administrative fee requirements or file an application to proceed IFP.”

agree with court
The dismissal is procedurally correct. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), a civil action in district court requires a filing fee. If the fee is not paid, the plaintiff must file an application to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The order recites that the plaintiff did neither. Dismissal without prejudice is the standard remedy for this procedural defect, allowing the plaintiff to cure the deficiency and refile.

Ordering the Clerk of the Court to close the case.

“The Court ORDERS the Clerk of the Court to close the case.”

agree with court
Closing the case is the appropriate administrative step following a dismissal without prejudice for failure to pay fees, particularly when a specific deadline to reopen is provided.

The order itself: sound — The order correctly identifies the statutory requirements for filing fees and the alternative of proceeding in forma pauperis. It cites appropriate Ninth Circuit authority (Andrews and Rodriguez) to support the proposition that failure to do either results in dismissal. The remedy of dismissal without prejudice is standard and allows the plaintiff to cure the defect. The reasoning is direct and legally sound.

How this analysis was made · dispute it

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ZACHARY MARNER, et al., Case No.: 3:24-cv-00502-RBM-MMP 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL 13 v. ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO PAY FILING 14 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FEE REQUIRED BY 28 U.S.C. § FORCE, et al., 15 1914(a) OR FILE AN APPLICATION Defendants. TO PROCEED IN FORMA 16 PAUPERIS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. 17 § 1915(a)

19 20 On March 13, 2024, Plaintiff Zachary Marner (“Plaintiff”), seemingly proceeding 21 pro se on behalf of himself and the other named plaintiffs, filed a Notice of Lawsuit for 22 $7,000,000, which the Court construes as a complaint for damages. (Doc. 1.) 23 All parties instituting any civil action, suit, or proceeding in a district court of the 24 United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of 25 $405, consisting of a $350 statutory fee plus an additional administrative fee of $55, 26 although the $55 administrative fee does not apply to persons granted leave to proceed in 27 forma pauperis (“IFP”). See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) (Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees, 28 District Court Misc. Fee Schedule, § 14 (eff. Dec. 1, 2023)). An action may proceed despite 1 plaintiff's failure to prepay the entire fee only if he is granted leave to proceed IFP 2 || pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1051 (9th Cir. 3 2007); Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). 4 Plaintiff has not prepaid the $405 in filing and administrative fees or filed an 5 || application to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Accordingly, this action is 6 || DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to satisfy the filing and administrative fee 7 requirements or file an application to proceed IFP. See Turner v. Chase Bank, Case No:: 8 24-cv-455 JLS (AHG), 2024 WL 1099694, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 13, 2024). The Court 9 || ORDERS the Clerk of the Court to close the case. Plaintiff may re-open his case on or 10 || before September 25, 2025 by (1) paying the filing and administrative fees or (2) filing an 11 || application to proceed IFP. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 || DATE: September 2, 2025 14 Get Basmals, Mistery > 15 HON. RUTH BERMUDEZ'MONTENEGRO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28