Madsen v. Risenhoover et al

Filing 141

ORDER re 136 Notice of Appeal, filed by Rick Madsen. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 4/26/13. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/26/2013)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 OAKLAND DIVISION 4 5 6 RICK MADSEN, Case No: C 09-5457 SBA (pr) 7 ORDER CERTIFYING THAT PLAINTIFF’S APPEAL IS NOT IN GOOD FAITH UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) AND DENYING LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS 8 Plaintiff, vs. 9 RISENHOOVER, et al., 10 Defendants. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 In March 29, 2013, the Court issued its Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Dkt. 134. The Court also referred the matter for a settlement conference, pursuant to Northern District’s Prisoner Settlement Program. On April 25, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal from the Court’s March 29 Order. Dkt. 136. A prisoner must seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal in the district court. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a). As in the district court, a prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis on appeal will be required to pay the full filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). If the district court finds that the appeal is frivolous and not taken in good faith and revokes in forma pauperis status, or if the prisoner never had such status and moves in the Ninth Circuit to proceed in forma pauperis, the Ninth Circuit will conduct an independent review of the record to determine whether the appeal is frivolous. The Ninth Circuit will decide whether to grant the prisoner in forma pauperis status. If in forma pauperis status is denied by the Ninth Circuit, the prisoner will nonetheless be directed to pay the entire filing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 fee and to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as frivolous. See id. § 1915(e)(2). Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), “[a]n appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.” A notice of appeal taken from an order that is not immediately appealable is not in good faith. Javor v. Brown, 295 F.2d 60, 61 (9th Cir. 1961) (“If it appears from the record that the order sought to be reviewed is not appealable, the conclusion is warranted that the appeal is not taken in good faith.”) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)). Here, the order from which the notice of appeal has been taken is not a final order. See Safe Flight Instr. Corp. v. McDonnell-Douglas Corp., 482 F.2d 1086, 1093 (9th Cir.1973) (“Ordinarily the denial of a motion for summary judgment is not appealable, even where there has been an express direction and determination of the kind called for by Rule 54(b) . . . .”). Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY CERTIFIES that Plaintiff’s appeal from the Court’s Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is not taken in good faith, within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion seeking leave to appeal in forma pauperis is DENIED because this Court finds that the appeal is not taken in good faith. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(4), the Clerk is directed to provide notice of this Order to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the parties. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 26, 2013 ______________________________ SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG United States District Judge 22 23 24 25 26 27 G:\PRO-SE\SBA\CR.09\Masden5457.1915certification2.docx 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?