Shepard v. Miller et al

Filing 95

ORDER signed by Judge William B. Shubb on 2/23/2012 GRANTING 93 Motion to Proceed IFP. (Michel, G)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
----oo0oo---10
11
PAULA SHEPARD,

NO. CIV. 2:10-1863 WBS JFM

12
Plaintiff,
13

ORDER RE: MOTION TO PROCEED IN
FORMA PAUPERIS

v.
14
15

JANE MILER, an individual,
CAREER PRESS, INC., NEW PAGE
BOOKS, and DOES 1-100.

16
17

Defendants.
___________________________/

18
----oo0oo---19
20

Presently before the court is plaintiff’s motion to

21

proceed in forma pauperis.

22

entered in this case on January 12, 2012, and plaintiff has filed

23

an appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in which she

24

has filed an identical motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

25

(Docket No. 93.)

Final judgment was

The filing of a notice of appeal transfers jurisdiction

26

from the district court to the court of appeals with respect to

27

all matters involved in the appeal.

28

Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58-59 (1982).
1

Griggs v. Provident Consumer
This transfer of

1

jurisdiction is designed to avoid the confusion and inefficiency

2

of two courts considering the same issues simultaneously.

3

Masalosalo by Masalosalo v. Stonewall Ins. Co., 718 F.2d 955, 956

4

(9th Cir. 1983).

5

occasions, however, to determine whether forma pauperis status

6

should continue for plaintiffs on appeal.

7

California, No. 11-743, slip op. at 1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 18, 2012);

8

Wilkins v. Freitas, No. 09-323, slip. op. at 1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 6,

9

2011).

See

This court has been asked on numerous

See, e.g., Gilmore v.

In the interest of judicial efficiency, the court will

10

make such determination at the present time, when the case is

11

fresh in the court’s mind.

12

Denial of forma pauperis status at the appellate level

13

is appropriate where the district court finds the appeal to be

14

frivolous.

15

2002).

16

defendants’ special motion to strike pursuant to California’s

17

anti-SLAPP statute and is not patently frivolous.

18

having considered plaintiff’s Application to Proceed Without

19

Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit finds good cause supporting

20

plaintiff’s application and hereby GRANTS plaintiff’s request to

21

proceed in forma pauperis.

22
23

Hooker v. Am. Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir.

Plaintiff’s appeal concerns the court’s order granting

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: February 23, 2012

24
25
26
27
28
2

The court