Knapp v. Cate, et al.

Filing 160

Notice and ORDER Revoking In Forma Pauperis Status re 159 USCA Order, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 10/29/13. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7

8
9

ERIC CHARLES RODNEY KNAPP,

10
11

Plaintiff,
v.

12
13
14

MATTHEW CATE, et al.,
Defendants.

15
16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:08-cv-01779-AWI-BAM (PC)
NOTICE AND ORDER REVOKING IN
FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS
(ECF No. 159)

By notice entered October 24, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth

17

Circuit referred this matter to the District Court for the limited purpose of determining whether

18

in forma pauperis status should continue for this appeal or whether the appeal is frivolous or

19

taken in bad faith. See 28 U.S.C. §1915(a)(3); see also Hooker v. American Airlines, 302 F.3d

20

1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002) (revocation of in forma pauperis status appropriate where district

21

court finds the appeal to be frivolous).

22

Permitting litigants to proceed in forma pauperis is a privilege, not a right. Franklin v.

23

Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1231 (9th Cir. 1984); Williams v. Field, 394 F.2d 329, 332 (9th Cir.),

24

cert. denied, 393 U.S. 891 (1968); Williams v. Marshall, 795 F.Supp. 978, 978-79 (N.D. Cal.

25

1992). If a plaintiff with in forma pauperis status brings a case without arguable substance in

26

law and fact, the court may declare the case frivolous. Franklin, 745 F.2d at 1227. By its Order

27

Partially Adopting Findings and Recommendations Issued on August 12, 2013, and Order

28

Denying Plaintiff’s Requests for Injunctions as Moot, this Court granted Defendants’ motion for
1

1

summary judgment. In so doing, the Court found that Plaintiff essentially admitted that he was

2

never double-celled during the relevant time period and that Defendants could not have been

3

“deliberately indifferent” to his need for a single cell and he could not have been subjected to

4

“cruel and unusual punishment” in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 154.)

5

Plaintiff’s appeal therefore lacks an arguable basis in law and fact.

6

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:

7

1.

This matter is declared frivolous;

8

2.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), Plaintiff is not entitled to proceed in forma

9
10

pauperis in Appeal No. 13-17108, filed October 15, 2013;
3.

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(4), this Order serves as

11

notice to the parties and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit of the finding

12

that Plaintiff is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis for this appeal; and

13
14

4.

The Clerk of Court is directed to serve a copy of this Order on Plaintiff and the

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17

Dated: October 29, 2013

18

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28
2