Fosselman v. Tilton et al

Filing 7

ORDER granting Pla's 6 Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. Signed by Judge Irma E. Gonzalez on 1/18/2008. Secy of CA Dept of Corrections ordered to collect from Pla's prison trust acct the $350 balance in amount equal to 20% of the preceding month's income credited to the acct and forward to the Clerk of Court each time the amount in the acct exceeds $10 in accordance to 28 USC 1915(b)(2). USMS shall serve copy of Complaint and Summons upon each Dft. Dft ordered to reply to Complaint w/in time provided by FRCP 12(a). IFP Package prepared and mailed to Pla. Copy of the Order mailed to James Tilton, Secy of Dept of Corrections. (jah)

Fosselman v. Tilton et al

Doc. 7

Case 3:07-cv-01676-IEG-WMC

Document 7

Filed 01/18/2008

Page 1 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The court denied Plaintiff's first Motion to Proceed IFP on October 30, 2007 [Doc. No. 4] because Plaintiff failed to attach a certified copy of his prison trust account statement for the 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of his Complaint as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2).
K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\IEG\07cv1676-GrantIFP&Serve.wpd

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JEROME FOSSELMAN, CDCR #H-66012, Plaintiff, vs. JAMES TILTON, Secretary, Cal. Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation; VICTOR M. ALMAGER, Warden; CANDIE COOK, Medical Appeals Coordinator; Dr. CUMMINGS, Dentist, Defendants. Civil No. ORDER: (1) GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS, IMPOSING NO INITIAL PARTIAL FILING FEE, GARNISHING $350 FROM PRISONER'S TRUST ACCOUNT [Doc. No. 6]; AND (2) DIRECTING U.S. MARSHAL TO EFFECT SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(2) AND 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) 07-1676 IEG (WMc)

Jerome Fosselman ("Plaintiff"), a prisoner currently incarcerated at Centinela State Prison ("CEN") in Imperial, California, and proceeding pro se, has submitted a civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging inadequate dental treatment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Plaintiff has not prepaid the $350 filing fee mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); instead, he has filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis ("IFP") pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) [Doc. No. 6].1
1

-1-

07cv1676

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 3:07-cv-01676-IEG-WMC

Document 7

Filed 01/18/2008

Page 2 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

I.

Motion to Proceed IFP All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a district court of the United

States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of $350. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a party's failure to pay only if the party is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1051 (9th Cir. 2007); Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). Prisoners granted leave to proceed IFP however, remain obligated to pay the entire fee in installments, regardless of whether the action is ultimately dismissed for any reason. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) & (2). The Court finds that Plaintiff has now submitted an affidavit which complies with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), and has attached a certified copy of his trust account statement pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) and S.D. CAL. CIVLR 3.2. Plaintiff's trust account statement shows an average monthly balance and average monthly deposits of zero in his trust account during the six-month period preceding the filing of his Complaint, and a negative available balance due to "legal copies holds." Therefore, the Court finds Plaintiff has insufficient funds from which to pay any initial filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4) (providing that "[i]n no event shall a prisoner be prohibited from bringing a civil action or appealing a civil action or criminal judgment for the reason that the prisoner has no assets and no means by which to pay the initial partial filing fee."); Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d 844, 850 (9th Cir. 2002) (finding that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4) acts as a "safety-valve" preventing dismissal of a prisoner's IFP case based solely on a "failure to pay ... due to the lack of funds available to him when payment is ordered."). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed IFP [Doc. No. 6] and assesses no initial partial filing fee per 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). However, the Court further orders the Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR") to garnish the $350 balance of the filing fees owed in this case, collect and forward them to the Clerk of the Court pursuant to the installment payment provisions set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).
K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\IEG\07cv1676-GrantIFP&Serve.wpd

-2-

07cv1676

Case 3:07-cv-01676-IEG-WMC

Document 7

Filed 01/18/2008

Page 3 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

II.

Sua Sponte Screening per 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e) and 1915A The PLRA also obligates the Court to review complaints filed by all persons proceeding

IFP and by those, like Plaintiff, who are "incarcerated or detained in any facility [and] accused of, sentenced for, or adjudicated delinquent for, violations of criminal law or the terms or conditions of parole, probation, pretrial release, or diversionary program," "as soon as practicable after docketing." See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b). Under these provisions, the Court must sua sponte dismiss complaints, or any portions thereof, which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim, or which seek damages from defendants who are immune. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A; Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (§ 1915(e)(2)); Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 446 (9th Cir. 2000) (§ 1915A); see also Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (discussing § 1915A). "[W]hen determining whether a complaint states a claim, a court must accept as true all allegations of material fact and must construe those facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff." Resnick, 213 F.3d at 447; Barren, 152 F.3d at 1194 (noting that § 1915(e)(2) "parallels the language of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)"). Here, the Court finds that Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment inadequate dental care claims survive the sua sponte screening required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b), and that Plaintiff is therefore entitled to U.S. Marshal service on his behalf. See Lopez, 203 F.3d at 112627; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) ("The officers of the court shall issue and serve all process, and perform all duties in [IFP] cases."); FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(2) (providing that "service be effected by a United States marshal, deputy Untied States marshal, or other officer specially appointed by the court ... when the plaintiff is authorized to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915."). Plaintiff is cautioned, however, that "the sua sponte screening and dismissal procedure is cumulative of, and not a substitute for, any subsequent Rule 12(b)(6) motion that [a defendant] may choose to bring." Teahan v. Wilhelm, 481 F. Supp. 2d 1115, 1119 (S.D. Cal. 2007). /// ///
K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\IEG\07cv1676-GrantIFP&Serve.wpd

-3-

07cv1676

Case 3:07-cv-01676-IEG-WMC

Document 7

Filed 01/18/2008

Page 4 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

III.

Conclusion and Order Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) [Doc. No. 6]

is GRANTED. 2. The Secretary of California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, or his

designee, is ordered to collect from Plaintiff's prison trust account the $350 balance of the filing fee owed in this case by collecting monthly payments from the trust account in an amount equal to twenty percent (20%) of the preceding month's income credited to the account and forward payments to the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in the account exceeds $10 in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). ALL PAYMENTS SHALL BE CLEARLY

IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS ACTION. 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on James Tilton,

Secretary, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, P.O. Box 942883, Sacramento, California 94283-0001. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that: 4. The Clerk shall issue a summons upon Defendants JAMES TILTON, VICTOR

M. ALMAGER, CANDIE COOK and Dr. CUMMINGS, and forward it to Plaintiff along with a blank U.S. Marshal Form 285 for each of these Defendants. In addition, the Clerk shall provide Plaintiff with a certified copy of this Order, and certified copies of his Complaint and the summons for purposes of serving each of these Defendants. Upon receipt of this "IFP Package," Plaintiff is directed to complete the Form 285s as completely and accurately as possible, and to return them to the United States Marshal according to the instructions provided by the Clerk in the letter accompanying his IFP package.2 Thereafter, the U.S. Marshal shall serve a copy of the Complaint and summons upon each Defendant as directed by Plaintiff on each Form 285. All costs of service shall be advanced by the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(2).

Plaintiff is advised to include the street address of the prison where he believes the Defendant may be found on each U.S. Marshal Form 285.
K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\IEG\07cv1676-GrantIFP&Serve.wpd

2

-4-

07cv1676

Case 3:07-cv-01676-IEG-WMC

Document 7

Filed 01/18/2008

Page 5 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

5.

Defendants are thereafter ORDERED to reply to the Complaint within the time

provided by the applicable provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a). See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(g)(2) (while Defendants may occasionally be permitted to "waive the right to reply to any action brought by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility under section 1983," once the Court has conducted its sua sponte screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and § 1915A(b), and thus, has made a preliminary determination based on the face on the pleading alone that Plaintiff has a "reasonable opportunity to prevail on the merits," Defendants are required to respond). 6. Plaintiff shall serve upon Defendants or, if appearance has been entered by

counsel, upon Defendants' counsel, a copy of every further pleading or other document submitted for consideration of the Court. Plaintiff shall include with the original paper to be filed with the Clerk of the Court a certificate stating the manner in which a true and correct copy of any document was served on Defendants, or counsel for Defendants, and the date of service. Any paper received by the Court which has not been filed with the Clerk or which fails to include a Certificate of Service will be disregarded.

DATED: January 18, 2008 IRMA E. GONZALEZ, Chief Judge United States District Court

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\IEG\07cv1676-GrantIFP&Serve.wpd

-5-

07cv1676