Lupercio v. Heusden et al

Filing 13

ORDER DENYING 12 Motion to Proceed IFP as MOOT. Plaintiff's IFP status continues for purposes of appeal. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 9/25/2013. (Timken, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14
15

RAMON N. LUPERCIO,

16
17

Plaintiff,
v.

18

JAMES HEUSDENS, et al.,

19

Case No. 1:13-cv-00628-LJO-SKO
DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO
PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AS
MOOT

Defendants.
____________________________________/

(Doc. 12)

20
21
22

On September 18, 2013, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a motion for leave to appeal in

23 forma pauperis ("IFP"). Plaintiff was granted IFP status on July 2, 2013 (Doc. 3). Pursuant to
24 28 U.S.C. § 1915, "in no event shall a prisoner be prohibited from bringing a civil action or
25 appealing a civil or criminal judgment for the reason that the prisoner has no assets and no means
26 by which to pay the initial partial filing fee." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4) (emphasis added). Thus, IFP
27 status typically carries forward throughout an appeal in the Ninth Circuit and indeed, this
28 continuing status is noted in the docket entry for Plaintiff's Notice of Appeal at Docket Number

1 9-1, indicating that no fee on appeal was required because Plaintiff was granted IFP.
2

Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's motion for IFP as moot. Fed. R. App. P.

3 24(a)(3). As set forth above, Plaintiff's IFP status continues for purposes of appeal.
4
5
6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

9

September 25, 2013

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11

DEAC_Signature-END:

d70o4d

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2