In Re: Kevin King

Filing 3

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 4/18/2018 REVOKING plaintiff's IFP status. CASE CLOSED. (cc: BAP Clerk, Bankruptcy Judge Klein, and Bankruptcy Clerk Sacramento). (York, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KEVIN E. KING,

12

Appellant,

13
14
15

No. 18-mc-0049-WBS AC

v.

ORDER

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE
ASSOCIATION, et al.,
Appellee.

16
17
18

This matter was transferred by the U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”) to the

19

District Court for the limited purpose of ruling on plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma

20

pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff is proceeding in this action

21

pro se. This matter was accordingly referred to the undersigned by E.D. Cal. 302(c)(21).
Plaintiff’s IFP application does make the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1)

22
23

with regard to his financial status. ECF No. 2. However, “[a]n appeal may not be taken in forma

24

pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. §

25

1915(a)(3). The test for allowing an appeal in forma pauperis is easily met; the good faith

26

requirement is satisfied if the appellant seeks review of any issue that is not frivolous. Gardner v.

27

Pogue, 558 F.2d 548, 551 (9th Cir. 1977).

28

////
1

1

Here, the good faith requirement is not satisfied and IFP status must be revoked. The

2

court has taken judicial notice of the docket in plaintiff’s underlying bankruptcy court proceeding.

3

Fed. R. Evid. 201; United States v. Howard, 381 F.3d 873, 876 n. 1 (9th Cir.2004) (the court may

4

take judicial notice of court records in another case). It is clear from these records that plaintiff

5

moved to voluntarily dismiss his underlying bankruptcy case on March 13, 2018, and this motion

6

was granted on March 20, 2018. Bankruptcy Case at ECF Nos. 80, 82. The voluntary dismissal

7

of the underlying case dictates that the appeal to the BAP is not taken in good faith, and that

8

continuing IFP status is not justified. Thus, plaintiff’s IFP status is hereby REVOKED.

9

DATED: April 18, 2018

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2