Hines v. California Public Utilities Commission

Filing 89

ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Denying 88 Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis on Appeal. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/1/2011)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

DONNA HINES,

9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

No. C-10-2813 EMC

Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN
FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL

v.
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES
COMMISSION, et al.,

(Docket No. 88)

12
Defendants.
13
___________________________________/
14
15
16

Plaintiff Donna Hines has submitted an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on

17

appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Docket No. 88; see Fed. R. App. P. 24(a). Ms. Hines

18

seeks to appeal this Court’s April 5, 2011 Order granting the California Public Utilities

19

Commission’s motion to dismiss, Docket No. 44, and June 28, 2011 Order denying Plaintiff’s

20

motion for reconsideration, Docket No. 78.

21

The Court may not grant an application to proceed in forma pauperis if the appeal is “not

22

taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). “‘Not taken in good faith’ means ‘frivolous.’” Gray

23

v. Hamilton, No. C 10-4614, 2010 WL 4281812 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2010) (quoting Ellis v. United

24

States, 356 U.S. 674, 674-75, 78 S.Ct. 974, 2 L.Ed.2d 1060 (1958); Hooker v. American Airlines,

25

302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002)). In this case, Plaintiff’s appeal is premature because the Court

26

has not yet entered final judgment. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291, 1292(b). Another Defendant remains as

27

to whom the Court has not entered judgment, and Plaintiff has not requested, nor has the Court

28

1

directed, entry of a final judgment pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

2

Therefore, the Court hereby DENIES Plaintiff’s application without prejudice.

3

This order disposes of Docket No. 88.

4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6
7

Dated: August 1, 2011

8

_________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge

9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

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

2

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

DONNA HINES,

9

Plaintiff,
v.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

No. C-10-2813 EMC

CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES
COMMISSION, et al.,

12
Defendants.
13
14
___________________________________/
15
16
17

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the U.S. District Court, Northern

18

District of California. On the below date, I served a true and correct copy of the attached, by placing

19

said copy/copies in a postage-paid envelope addressed to the person(s) listed below, by depositing

20

said envelope in the U.S. Mail; or by placing said copy/copies into an inter-office delivery

21

receptacle located in the Office of the Clerk.

22

Donna Hines
268 Bush Street, #3204
San Francisco, CA 94104
415-205-3377

23
24
25
26
27
28

Dated: August 1, 2011

RICHARD W. WIEKING, CLERK
By:

/s/ Leni Doyle
Leni Doyle
Deputy Clerk