Randall v. California State Prison Sacramento

Filing 17

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 11/9/2016 DENYING plaintiff's 12 request to proceed IFP; plaintiff shall submit, within 30 days, a completed affidavit in support of his request to proceed ifp; and the Clerk shall send plaintiff a new ifp application. (Yin, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 VIRGIL DOUGLAS RANDALL, 11 12 13 14 15 No. 2:15-cv-2120 DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER WARDEN OF CALIFORNIA STATE PRISON, SACRAMENTO, Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 12, 2016, plaintiff was directed to complete the application form in 19 support of his request to proceed in forma paupers. Plaintiff has now filed a request for leave to 20 proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Plaintiff’s filing, however, is 21 insufficient as the second page of the application is missing. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). 22 Plaintiff will be provided another opportunity to submit the completed application in support of 23 his application to proceed in forma pauperis. 24 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 25 1. Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 12) is denied; 26 2. Plaintiff shall submit, within thirty days from the date of this order, a completed 27 affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma paupers. Plaintiff’s failure to comply with 28 this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice; and 1 1 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff a new Application to Proceed In 2 Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner. 3 Dated: November 9, 2016 4 5 6 7 8 /DLB7;rand2120.3e 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?