Harris, et al v. Costiloe, et al

Filing 7

ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers denying 6 Motion to Dismiss/Forgive Filing Fees in Action. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/17/2017)

Download PDF
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

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?