Burciaga v. Banh et al
ORDER requiring Plaintiff to file a correct IFP Application or pay filing fee signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 4/5/2017. (Motion for IFP due within 14-Days). (Attachments: # 1 IFP Application). (Lundstrom, T)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE
CORRECT APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN
FORMA PAUPERIS OR PAY FILING FEE
WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS
CASE NO. 1:17-cv-0200 DAD-BAM
JAMES BANH, et al.,
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, initiated this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983 on February 13, 2017. (Doc. 1). On February 15, 2017, the Court ordered Plaintiff to submit an
application to proceed informa pauperis in this action, or in the alternative, pay the filing fee in the
amount of $400.00 within forty-five days of the service of that order. (Doc. 2). On March 3, 2017,
Plaintiff filed a letter in “reply to the order to submit application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay
filing fee.” (Doc. 3). In his letter, Plaintiff appears to allege that House Joint Resolution 192 and
other laws forbid the government from enforcing the payment of monetary debts and therefore the
Court’s order that he submits an in forma pauperis application or pays a monetary filing fee is
unenforceable.1 Plaintiff’s theory is without merit. See Matchynski v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, 2014
U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6810 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 16, 2014) (“California courts have firmly rejected [the] theory
premised on the gold standard that a private individual’s issuance of documents claiming the
obligation of the United States to pay the face value constitutes tender”); Vann v. Wells Fargo Bank,
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72760 (N.D. Cal. May 24, 2012) (recognizing courts’ rejection of
House Joint Resolution 192 bears the heading, “To assure uniform value to the coins and currencies of the United
States,” and states, in essence, that obligations requiring payment “in gold or a particular kind of coin or currency, or in an
amount in money of the United States measured thereby” are against public policy, and that U.S. currency is legal tender
for all debts. H.R.J. Res. 192, 73d Cong. (1933).
“redemptionist” or “sovereign citizen” theories premised on House Joint Resolution 192); Bryant v.
Washington Mutual Bank, 524 F. Supp. 2d 753, 760 (W.D. Va. 2007) (Plaintiff’s reliance on House
Joint Resolution 192 to absolve her debt is “clearly nonsense”).
Plaintiff has not submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis on the appropriate form
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, nor does his reply letter satisfy the requirements of that section.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
The Clerk’s Office shall send to Plaintiff the attached form for application to proceed in
forma pauperis for a prisoner;
Within fourteen (14) days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall submit the
completed and signed application to proceed in forma pauperis for a prisoner, or in the alternative, pay
the $400.00 filing fee for this action; and
Failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
April 5, 2017
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?