Brown v. Curiel

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DOUGLAS W. BROWN, Case No.: 22-cv-730-MMA (DEB) Inmate No. 21148122, 12 ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL Plaintiff, 13 ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE vs. FOR FAILURE TO PAY FILING 14 FEE REQUIRED BY 28 U.S.C.

15 § 1914(a) AND/OR FAILURE TO U.S. PROBATION, San Diego, U.S. MOVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA 16 PROBATION, Riverside, U.S. DISTRICT PAUPERIS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. COURT, LENZY WOOLEY, U.S 17 § 1915(a) Probation Officer, KEYONNA 18 STANDFORD, U.S. Probation Officer, LAUREN DAY CUSITELLO, Attorney, 19 JEREMY D. WARREN, Attorney, 20 Defendants. 21 22 23 24 Plaintiff Douglas Wayne Brown, proceeding pro se and currently housed at George 25 Bailey Detention Center located in San Diego, California, has filed this civil rights action 26 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Doc. No. 1 (“Compl.”). 27 All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a district court of the 28 United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of 1 $402. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to 2 prepay the entire fee only if he is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 3 Section 1915(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1051 (9th Cir. 2007); 4 Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). However, if the Plaintiff is a 5 prisoner, and even if he is granted leave to commence his suit IFP, he remains obligated 6 to pay the entire filing fee in “increments,” see Williams v. Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1185 7 (9th Cir. 2015), regardless of whether his case is ultimately dismissed. See 28 U.S.C. 8 § 1915(b)(1) & (2); Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d 844, 847 (9th Cir. 2002). 9 Plaintiff has not prepaid the $402 in filing and administrative fees required to 10 commence this civil action, nor has he submitted a properly supported Motion to Proceed 11 IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Therefore, his case cannot yet proceed. See 28 12 U.S.C. § 1914(a); Andrews, 493 F.3d at 1051. 13 Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this civil action sua sponte without prejudice 14 based on Plaintiff’s failure to pay the $402 civil filing and administrative fee or to submit 15 a Motion to Proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) and § 1915(a). The Court 16 GRANTS Plaintiff forty-five (45) days leave from the date this Order is filed to either: 17 (a) prepay the entire $402 civil filing and administrative fee in full; or (b) complete and 18 file a Motion to Proceed IFP which includes a certified copy of his trust account 19 statement for the 6-month period preceding the filing of his Complaint. See 28 U.S.C. 20 § 1915(a)(2); S.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 3.2(b). 21 The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to provide Plaintiff with this Court’s 22 approved form “Motion and Declaration in Support of Motion to Proceed In Forma 23 Pauperis.” If Plaintiff fails to either prepay the $402 civil filing fee or complete and 24 submit the enclosed Motion to Proceed IFP within 45 days, this action will be dismissed 25 26 1 In addition to the $350 statutory fee, civil litigants must pay an additional administrative fee of $52. 27 See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) (Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees, District Court Misc. Fee Schedule, § 14 (eff. Dec. 1, 2020)). The additional $52 administrative fee does not apply to persons granted leave to 28 1 || without prejudice based on his failure to satisfy 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a)’s fee requirements.” 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 Dated: June 1, 2022 5 HON. MICHAEL M. ANELLO 6 United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ||? Plaintiff is cautioned that if he chooses to proceed further by either prepaying the full $402 civil filing 24 fee, or submitting a properly supported Motion to Proceed IFP, his 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. § 95 || 1915(e)(2)(B), regardless of whether he pays the full $402 filing fee at once, or is granted IFP status and is obligated to pay the full filing fee in installments. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (9th 26 || Cir. 2000) (en banc) (noting that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) “not only permits but requires” the court to sua sponte dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks 27 damages from defendants who are immune); see also Rhodes v. Robinson, 621 F.3d 1002, 1004 (9th Cir. 28 2010) (discussing similar screening required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A of all complaints filed by prisoners “seeking redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.”).