Opinion

Brown v. Curiel

Court
District Court, S.D. California
Filed
Jun 1, 2022
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 19.2%

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.”

How later courts described this case

  • 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.”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The 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.”).

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.