Milo L. Oliver v. Metro Transit, Alpha Project and Humane Society
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Anthony J. Battaglia (author)
Analysis
The court considered a pro se prisoner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) and his § 1983 complaint. The court denied the IFP motion and dismissed the action without prejudice because the plaintiff failed to submit the required certified prison trust account statement.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (IFP) Denied“Accordingly, the motion to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED.” | agree with court The court correctly applied 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2), which mandates that prisoners seeking IFP status must submit a certified copy of their trust fund account statement for the six months preceding the filing. The order recites that the plaintiff's application lacked this document. Under Ninth Circuit precedent (Andrews v. King), the court cannot grant IFP status without this specific financial documentation to assess the initial payment under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA). |
Civil Action Dismissed Without Prejudice“This action is DISMISSED without prejudice based on Plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fee or to submit a properly supported motion to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a) & 1915(a).” | agree with court Under 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), a civil action cannot proceed unless the filing fee is paid or the plaintiff is granted IFP status. Because the IFP motion was properly denied for lack of required documentation, the court was required to dismiss the action. Dismissing without prejudice is the standard procedural remedy to allow the plaintiff to cure the defect (pay the fee or file a proper IFP motion) within a set timeframe. |
Leave to Cure Granted (45 Days)“GRANTS Plaintiff forty-five (45) days leave from the date this Order is filed to: (a) prepay the entire $405 civil filing and administrative fee in full; or (b) complete and file a properly supported motion to proceed IFP...” | agree with court Granting leave to cure a procedural deficiency in a pro se prisoner case is consistent with the liberal construction afforded to pro se filings and the purpose of the PLRA, which allows for installment payments if IFP status is eventually granted. The 45-day period is a reasonable administrative timeframe. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It correctly identifies the statutory requirement for a certified trust account statement under the PLRA (28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2)). It relies on binding Ninth Circuit precedent (Andrews v. King) to support the denial of the IFP motion due to the missing document. The dismissal without prejudice and the grant of leave to cure are standard and appropriate remedies for a pro se prisoner who has failed to meet the initial filing requirements. The reasoning directly answers the motion with the correct authorities.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MILO L. OLIVER, Case No.: 25-cv-2932-AJB-VET BOOKING #25730390 12 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO Plaintiff, 13 PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS vs. AND DISMISSING CIVIL ACTION 14 15 METRO TRANSIT, ALPHA PROJECT 16 and HUMANE SOCIETY, 17 Defendants. 18 19 Plaintiff Milo L. Oliver, a San Diego County Jail detainee proceeding pro se, has 20 filed a civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 along with a motion to proceed 21 in forma pauperis (“IFP”). (Doc. Nos. 1–2.) 22 I. Motion to Proceed IFP 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 administrative fee does not apply to persons granted leave to proceed IFP. 27 See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) (Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees, District Court Misc. Fee 28 Schedule, § 14 (eff. Dec. 1, 2023)). The action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to 1 prepay the entire fee only if he is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2 § 1915(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1051 (9th Cir. 2007). Section 3 1915(a)(2) requires prisoners seeking leave to proceed IFP to submit a “certified copy of 4 the trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for . . . the 6-month period 5 immediately preceding the filing of the complaint.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2); Andrews v. 6 King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1119 (9th Cir. 2005). From the certified trust account statement, the 7 Court assesses an initial payment of 20% of (a) the average monthly deposits in the account 8 for the past six months, or (b) the average monthly balance in the account for the past six 9 months, whichever is greater, unless the prisoner has insufficient assets. See 28 U.S.C. 10 §§ 1915(b)(1)&(4); Bruce v. Samuels, 577 U.S. 82, 84 (2016). Prisoners who proceed IFP 11 must pay any remaining balance in “increments” or “installments,” regardless of whether 12 their action is ultimately dismissed. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(b)(1)&(2); Bruce, 577 U.S. at 84. 13 Plaintiff’s IFP application does not contain a trust fund account statement. (See ECF 14 No. 2.) The Court cannot grant his IFP application without a trust fund account statement 15 containing financial information for the 6-month period immediately preceding the filing 16 of his Complaint. See Andrews, 398 F.3d at 1119 (“[P]risoners must demonstrate that they 17 are not able to pay the filing fee with an affidavit and submission of their prison trust 18 account records.”) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1)&(2)). 19 Accordingly, the motion to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. This action 20 is DISMISSED without prejudice based on Plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fee or to 21 submit a properly supported motion to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a) & 22 1915(a). 23 II. Conclusion and Order 24 Accordingly, the Court: 25 (1) DENIES Plaintiff’s motion to proceed IFP without prejudice. 26 (2) DISMISSES this civil action without prejudice based on Plaintiff’s failure to 27 pay the civil filing and administrative fee or to submit a properly supported motion to 28 proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a) & 1915(a). 1 (3) GRANTS Plaintiff forty-five (45) days leave from the date this Order is filed 2 || to: (a) prepay the entire $405 civil filing and administrative fee in full; or (b) complete and 3 || file a properly supported motion to proceed IFP which includes a certified copy of his 4 || prison trust account statement for the 6-month period preceding the filing of his Complaint. 5 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2); S.D. Cal. CivLR 3.2(b). If Plaintiff fails to either pay the $405 6 || civil filing fee or submit a properly supported motion to proceed IFP within 45 days, this 7 |{action will remain dismissed without prejudice based solely on his failure to satisfy 8 U.S.C. § 1914(a)’s fee requirement and without further Order of the Court. 9 IT ISSO ORDERED 10 || Dated: November 21, 2025 © ¢ Hon. Anthony J. attaglia 12 United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3