Ransom v. Herrera et al

Filing 10

ORDER DENYING 8 Motion for Refund of Filing Fee, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 8/13/14. (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LEONARD RANSOM, JR.,

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
vs.

1:11-cv-01709-GSA-PC
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
REFUND OF FILING FEE
(Doc. 8.)

DANNY HERRERA, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17
18
19

Leonard Ransom, Jr. (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights

20

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on

21

October 13, 2011. (Doc. 1.) On November 21, 2011, Plaintiff paid the $350.00 filing fee for

22

this action.1 (Court Record.) The court screened the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A

23

and issued an order on August 12, 2014, requiring Plaintiff to either file an amended complaint

24

or notify the court that he is willing to proceed only on the claims found cognizable by the

25

court, within thirty days. (Doc. 9.)

26
27
1

28

The fee for filing a civil action has since increased to $400.00. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), Judicial
Conference Schedule of Fees effective December 1, 2013 (parties instituting a civil suit are required to pay a filing
fee of $350 plus an administrative fee of $50.)
1

1

On July 21, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion for a refund of the $350.00 filing fee. (Doc.

2

8.) Plaintiff contends that he is entitled to a refund because the court has not timely adjudicated

3

this matter or allowed Plaintiff to litigate this action.

4

The court notes Plaintiff’s objections to the court’s delay in the screening of his

5

Complaint. The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners, such as Plaintiff,

6

seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.

7

28 U.S.C. ' 1915A(a). While the court ordinarily screens complaints in the order in which they

8

are filed and strives to avoid delays whenever possible, delays are inevitable despite the court’s

9

best efforts in responding to the hundreds of prisoner civil rights cases presently pending before

10

the court. Plaintiff's Complaint has now been screened and the court awaits Plaintiff’s response

11

to the screening order.

12

Plaintiff is advised that he is not entitled to a refund of the filing fee for this action if the

13

case is delayed, or even if the case is dismissed. The filing fee is collected by the court as

14

payment for filing the case, and Plaintiff=s case was filed. The subsequent proceedings in a

15

case do not change the fact that the case was filed. Even if Plaintiff were proceeding in forma

16

pauperis, without prepayment of the filing fee, he would be required to pay the filing fee in full.

17

28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(2) (emphasis added).

18
19

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for refund
of the filing fee for this action, filed on July 21, 2014, is DENIED.

20
21
22

23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 13, 2014

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28
2