Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL ARLONDO MONET Case No.: 26-cv-0402-AJB-SBC WILLIAMS, 12 INMATE #24735404 ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL 13 ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff, FOR FAILING TO PAY 14 vs. FILING FEE REQUIRED 15 BY 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) AND/OR FAILING TO MOVE TO PROCEED 16 U.S.A. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, et IN FORMA PAUPERIS al., 17 PURSUANT TO Defendants. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) 18 19 20 21 Michael Orlondo Monet Williams (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se 22 with a civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. No. 1.) Plaintiff has not 23 paid the civil filing fee nor filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). 24 I. FAILURE TO PAY FILING FEE OR REQUEST IFP STATUS 25 All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a district court of the 26 United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of 27 $405, consisting of a $350 statutory fee plus an additional administrative fee of $55, 28 although the $55 administrative fee does not apply to persons granted leave to proceed IFP. 1 See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) (Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees, District Court Misc. Fee 2 Schedule, § 14 (eff. Dec. 1, 2023)). An action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to 3 prepay the entire fee only if he is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 4 § 1915(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1051 (9th Cir. 2007); Rodriguez v. 5 Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). However, if Plaintiff is a prisoner, and even if 6 he is granted leave to commence his suit IFP, he remains obligated to pay the entire filing 7 fee in “increments,” see Williams v. Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir. 2015), 8 regardless of whether his case is ultimately dismissed. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) & (2); 9 Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d 844, 847 (9th Cir. 2002). 10 Plaintiff has not prepaid the $405 in filing and administrative fees required to 11 commence this civil action, nor has he submitted a motion to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 12 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Therefore, his case cannot yet proceed. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); 13 Andrews, 493 F.3d at 1051. 14 II. CONCLUSION AND ORDER 15 Accordingly, the Court: 16 1. DISMISSES this civil action sua sponte without prejudice based on 17 Plaintiff’s failure to pay the $405 civil filing and administrative fee or to submit a motion 18 to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) and § 1915(a); and 19 2. GRANTS Plaintiff forty-five (45) days leave from the date this Order is filed 20 to: (a) prepay the entire $405 civil filing and administrative fee in full; or (b) complete and 21 file a motion to proceed IFP which includes a certified copy of his trust account statement 22 for the 6-month period preceding the filing of his Complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2); 23 CivLR 3.2(b). 24 The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to provide Plaintiff with this Court’s 25 approved form “Motion and Declaration in Support of Motion to Proceed In Forma 26 Pauperis.” If Plaintiff fails to either pay the $405 civil filing fee or submit a properly 27 supported motion to proceed IFP within forty-five (45) days, this action will remain 28 dismissed without prejudice based solely on his failure to satisfy 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a)’s fee 1 requirement and without further Order of the Court.! 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 Dated: March 3, 2026 © 4 Hon, Anthony J.Battaglia 5 United States District Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 LS || ao 16 ||) plaintiff is cautioned that if he chooses to proceed further by either prepaying the full 17 ||$405 civil filing fee, or submitting a properly supported Motion to Proceed IFP, his 12 Complaint will be screened before service and may be dismissed sua sponte pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) and/or 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), regardless of whether he pays the 19 || full $405 filing fee at once, or is granted IFP status and is obligated to pay the full filing 20 fee in installments. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (noting that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) “not only permits but requires” the court to sua sponte 21 ||dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, 59 or seeks damages from defendants who are immune); see also Rhodes v. Robinson, 621 F.3d 1002, 1004 (9th Cir. 2010) (discussing similar screening required by 28 U.S.C. 23 ||§ 1915A of all complaints filed by prisoners “seeking redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity”). If Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim or as frivolous or malicious, it may thereafter be considered a 25 || ‘“‘strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) provides that “[i]n no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding 6 under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or 27 || detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was 28 dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is in imminent danger of serious physical injury.”