Robben v. El Dorado County et al

Filing 10

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/26/17 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TODD ROBBEN,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:16-cv-2695 MCE KJN P
Plaintiff,

v.

FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

EL DORADO COUNTY, et al.,
Defendant.

16
17

Plaintiff is a county jail inmate, proceeding pro se, with a civil rights action pursuant to 42

18

U.S.C. § 1983. On November 17, 2016, plaintiff was ordered to submit a completed affidavit in

19

support of his request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915,

20

because the certificate portion of the request was not completed by jail officials, and plaintiff did

21

not provide a certified copy of his jail trust account statement for the prior six months. Plaintiff

22

was cautioned that failure to comply with the court’s order would result in a recommendation that

23

this action be dismissed. (ECF No. 4.)

24

Section 1915(a)(2) requires “a prisoner seeking to bring a civil action without prepayment

25

of fees or security therefor, in addition to filing the affidavit filed under paragraph (1), shall

26

submit a certified copy of the trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the

27

prisoner for the 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint . . . , obtained

28

from the appropriate official of each prison at which the prisoner is or was confined.”
1

1

On December 8, 2016, plaintiff filed another motion to proceed in forma pauperis, but

2

again failed to provide the certified jail trust account statement and jail officials did not complete

3

the certificate portion of the form he submitted. Because plaintiff is not in the custody of the

4

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”), county jail officials must

5

provide the certification. Plaintiff has not submitted a certified copy of his trust account

6

statement or the institutional equivalent, or otherwise explained his failure to comply with the

7

November 17, 2016 order.1

8
9

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without
prejudice.

10

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

11

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days

12

after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections

13

with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

14

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that

15

failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District

16

Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

17

Dated: January 26, 2017

18
/robb2695.fifp

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The court has the power to control its docket and the cases pending before it. Ferdik v.
Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 915 (1992). Error! Main
Document Only.Plaintiff has multiple cases pending in this district. In his December 15, 2016
filing, plaintiff lists eight different cases he has filed. (ECF No. 8 at 1-2.) Thus, plaintiff should
be aware of the procedures required to seek in forma pauperis status. For example, in two of his
cases, plaintiff was provided multiple opportunities to submit the certified trust account
statement, and on January 17, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge required plaintiff to provide the
court with a copy of his request for a copy of his certified trust account statement along with any
response from jail officials. Robben v. City of South Lake Tahoe, No. 2:16-cv-2696 WBS EFB
(E.D. Cal.); Robben v. Norling, No. 2:16-cv-2699 WBS EFB (E.D. Cal.). Review of plaintiff’s
cases demonstrates an inordinate expenditure of judicial resources to obtain certified financial
information which plaintiff is required to provide under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. See No. 2:16-cv-2696
WBS EFB (three orders); No. 2:16-cv-2699 WBS EFB (three orders); Robbin v. El Dorado
County, No. 2:16-cv-2697 JAM KJN (E.D. Cal.) (two orders). The undersigned is not inclined to
recommend that the court waste its limited resources on such preliminary issues.
2