Nguyen v. Biter et al

Filing 21

ORDER ADDRESSING Plaintiff's Objection and Clarifying Previous Order Concerning In Forma Pauperis Application Deficiency signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 6/15/2011. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

ANTHONY NGUYEN,

10
11
12

CASE NO. 1:11-cv-00809-OWW-SKO PC

Plaintiff,

ORDER ADDRESSING PLAINTIFF’S
OBJECTION AND CLARIFYING PREVIOUS
ORDER CONCERNING IN FORMA
PAUPERIS APPLICATION DEFICIENCY

v.
BITER, M.D., et al.,

(Docs. 7 and 19)
13

Defendants.
/

14
15

Plaintiff Anthony Nguyen, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action

16

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on May 18, 2011. On May 20, 2011, the Court issued an order

17

requiring Plaintiff to either file an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the $350.00 filing

18

fee in full, and on June 13, 2011, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to

19

comply, which was filed on June 9, 2011.

20

On June 10, 2011, Plaintiff filed an objection to the May 20 order. There is no provision for

21

“objecting” to the order at issue, but in light of the fact that the Court’s earlier order was not clear

22

as to the deficiency at issue, Plaintiff’s objection shall be addressed and the order is clarified as

23

follows.

24

Plaintiff filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis on May 18, 2011. The application

25

Plaintiff filed was not on a form accepted by this division in that it lacked the requisite authorization

26
27
28
1

1

for the deduction of the filing fee from Plaintiff’s trust account, when funds are available.1 Plaintiff

2

was provided with the correct form, which he must complete and return. Plaintiff’s first application

3

was accompanied by a certified copy of his trust account statement and therefore, Plaintiff is not

4

required to submit another trust account statement. Plaintiff need only fill out the application and

5

return it.

6

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s objection is HEREBY DEEMED ADDRESSED.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9

Dated:
i0d3h8

June 15, 2011

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The in forma pauperis statute does not authorize a fee waiver. It merely provides that prisoners may
proceed without prepayment of the filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). The filing fee is still assessed and it must be
collected when funds exist. Id.

2