Harris, et al v. Hurley, et al

Filing 9

ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers denying 8 Motion to Dismiss/Forgive Filing Fees in action. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/17/2017)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

In re MARVIN HARRIS,

5

Case Nos. 96-cv-03827-DLJ (PR), 96-cv03828-DLJ (PR), 97-cv-00501-DLJ (PR)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTIONS TO DISMISS/FORGIVE
FILING FEES IN THE ABOVEREFERENCED ACTIONS

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

These are closed civil rights actions. The Court denied Plaintiff’s motions for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and dismissed the instant actions. Any appeals pursued in
these actions were terminated because Plaintiff did not pay the filing fees for the appeals.
Before the Court are identical motions and declarations filed in each action, in which
Plaintiff claims that the Court’s Finance Department sent him a “past due notice” to pay the
outstanding filing fees, including filing fees for appeals. Plaintiff alleges that he is unable to pay
any filing fees, and he requests that the Court dismiss or forgive the filing fees in these actions.
Ordinarily, a plaintiff is permitted to file a civil action in federal court without prepayment
of fees or security if he makes affidavit that he is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.

18

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). If the plaintiff is a “prisoner” who alleges that he is unable to pay the

19

full filing fee at the time of filing, he must submit (1) an affidavit that includes a statement of all

20

assets he possesses, and (2) a certified copy of the trust fund account statement (or institutional

21

equivalent) for the prisoner for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of the

22

action, obtained from the appropriate official of each prison at which the prisoner is or was

23

confined. See id. § 1915(a)(1),(2).

24

If the Court determines that the plaintiff is unable to pay the full filing fee at the time of

25

filing, the plaintiff will be granted leave to proceed IFP. However, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) only

26

authorizes the district court to waive prepayment of the filing fee, not the filing fee itself. See 28

27

U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Thus, payment of the full filing fee is required of the party who institutes the

28

action, whether or not he or she is proceeding IFP. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914, 1915(b)(1).

1

Here, Plaintiff’s motions for leave to proceed IFP were denied, and the filing fees were due

2

when he filed each of the actions at issue. Moreover, there are no valid grounds to waive these

3

filing fees or any filing fees for appeals. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request to dismiss or forgive the

4

filing fees in the above-reference actions is DENIED on the ground that the Court has no authority

5

to waive the filing fees. See id. Therefore, the Court’s Finance Department may still collect the

6

outstanding filing fees in these actions from Plaintiff.

7
8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 17, 2017
______________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
United States District Judge

United States District Court
Northern District of California

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