Waiton v. Post et al

Filing 13

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST TO STAY INITIAL PARTIAL FILING FEE re 10 Request to Stay filed by Thomas David Waiton. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on October 21, 2013. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/21/2013)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

THOMAS DAVID WAITON,

Case No. 13-cv-02439-JST (PR)

Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
10

KERRI POST, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S
REQUEST TO STAY INITIAL
PARTIAL FILING FEE
Re: Dkt. No. 10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Plaintiff, a state prisoner currently incarcerated at the Sonoma County Main Adult

14

Detention Facility, filed a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August

15

27, 2013, the Court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim. The Court also granted

16

plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) and ordered plaintiff to pay

17

an initial partial filing fee of $49.80. The Court ordered that the funds for the remainder of the

18

filing fee will be taken from income to plaintiff's account in accordance with 28 U.S.C.

19

§ 1915(b)(1).

20

On September 4, 2013, plaintiff filed a letter with the Court in which plaintiff made new

21

allegations and requested that the Court vacate its order of dismissal. On October 4, 2013, the

22

Sonoma County Sheriff's Office sent the Court a letter explaining that plaintiff refused to allow the

23

release of funds from his inmate trust account to the Court. On October 7, 2013, plaintiff filed a

24

request to stay the Court's order directing payment of the filing fee so that he could seek an appeal

25

of the Court's order of dismissal.

26

On October 16, 2013, the Court reopened the action finding that, based on plaintiff's new

27

allegations contained in his September 4, 2013 letter, plaintiff might be able to state a claim for

28

denial of access to the courts. The Court granted plaintiff leave to amend his complaint.

1

Accordingly, plaintiff's request to stay payment of the filing fee is DENIED. Plaintiff is

2

advised that notwithstanding a prisoner's compliance with the requirements of § 1915(a) and the

3

grant of IFP status, the prisoner is required to pay the full amount of the filing fee. See 28 U.S.C.

4

§ 1915(b)(1). The Ninth Circuit has held that the filing fee provisions of the Prison Litigation

5

Reform Act (PLRA), which require even indigent prisoners to pay the entire filing fee in

6

installments as funds become available in their trust accounts, do not violate a prisoner's

7

constitutional rights to access the courts or to equal protection. See Taylor v Delatoore, 281 F.3d

8

844, 848-50 (9th Cir. 2002).

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Based on the foregoing, within thirty (30) days of this order, plaintiff must pay the initial
partial filing fee of $49.80. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this action.
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this order to plaintiff, the Sonoma County Sheriff's

12

Office, and the Court's financial office.

13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15
16

Dated: October 21, 2013
______________________________________
JON S. TIGAR
United States District Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2