Taylor v. Anderson et al

Filing 4

ORDER (1) granting 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, imposing no partial filing fee, garnishing $350 balance from Prisoner's trust account; The Secretary CDCR, or his designee, is ordered to collect from prison trust acco unt the $350 balance of the filing fee owed in this case by collecting monthly payments from the trust account in an amount equal to 20% of the preceding month income credited to the account and forward payments to the Clerk of the Court ea ch time the amount in the account exceeds $10 in accordance with 28 USC 1915(b)(2) ; (2) denying 3 Motion to Appoint Counsel; (3) directing U.S. Marshaal to effect service of complaint. Signed by Judge Cathy Ann Bencivengo on 4/4/13. (forms mailed) (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(cge)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

TRACY LE TAYLOR,
CDCR #E-13981,

Civil No.

Plaintiff,

13

ORDER:
(1) GRANTING MOTION TO
PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS,
IMPOSING NO PARTIAL FILING
FEE, GARNISHING $350 BALANCE
FROM PRISONER’S TRUST
ACCOUNT [ECF No. 2];

14
15

vs.

16
17
18
19

13cv0742 CAB (RBB)

(2) DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
[ECF No. 3]

SHERYL ANDERSON; T. BOREM;
CHARLES RICHEY;

AND

20

(3) DIRECTING U.S. MARSHAL
TO EFFECT SERVICE OF
COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO
FED.R.CIV .P. 4(c)(3) & 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(d)

Defendants.

21
22
23
24

Tracy Taylor (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner currently incarcerated at California State

25

Prison - Los Angeles County, located in Lancaster, California, and proceeding pro se, has

26

submitted a civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has filed a Motion to Proceed

27

In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) [ECF No. 2], along with a Motion

28

for Appointment of Counsel [ECF No. 3].

I:\Everyone\_EFILE-PROSE\CAB\13cv0742-grt IFP & csl & serve.wpd, 4413

1

13cv0742 CAB (RBB)

1

I.

MOTION TO PROCEED IFP [ECF NO. 2]

2

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

3

States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of $350. See 28

4

U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to prepay the entire fee

5

only if the plaintiff is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See

6

Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). However, prisoners granted leave to

7

proceed IFP remain obligated to pay the entire fee in installments, regardless of whether their

8

action is ultimately dismissed. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) & (2).

9

The Court finds that Plaintiff has submitted an affidavit which complies with 28 U.S.C.

10

§ 1915(a)(1), and that he has attached a certified copy of his trust account statement pursuant to

11

28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) and S.D. CAL. CIVLR 3.2. Plaintiff’s trust account statement shows that

12

he has no available funds from which to pay filing fees at this time. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4).

13

Therefore, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP [ECF No. 2] and assesses no

14

initial partial filing fee per 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). However, the entire $350 balance of the

15

filing fee mandated shall be collected and forwarded to the Clerk of the Court pursuant to the

16

installment payment provisions set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).

17

II.

MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL [ECF NO. 3]

18

Plaintiff also requests the appointment of counsel to assist him in prosecuting this civil

19

action. The Constitution provides no right to appointment of counsel in a civil case, unless an

20

indigent litigant may lose his physical liberty if he loses the litigation. Lassiter v. Dept. of Social

21

Services, 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981). Nonetheless, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), district courts are

22

granted discretion to appoint counsel for indigent persons. This discretion may be exercised only

23

under “exceptional circumstances.” Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991). “A

24

finding of exceptional circumstances requires an evaluation of both the ‘likelihood of success

25

on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the

26

complexity of the legal issues involved.’ Neither of these issues is dispositive and both must be

27

viewed together before reaching a decision.” Id. (quoting Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d

28

1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986)).

I:\Everyone\_EFILE-PROSE\CAB\13cv0742-grt IFP & csl & serve.wpd, 4413

2

13cv0742 CAB (RBB)

1

The Court denies Plaintiff’s request without prejudice, as neither the interests of justice

2

nor exceptional circumstances warrant appointment of counsel at this time. LaMere v. Risley,

3

827 F.2d 622, 626 (9th Cir. 1987); Terrell, 935 F.2d at 1017.

4

III.

INITIAL SCREENING PER 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(b)(ii) and 1915A(b)(1)

5

Notwithstanding IFP status or the payment of any partial filing fee, the Court must subject

6

each civil action commenced pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) to mandatory screening and order

7

the sua sponte dismissal of any case it finds “frivolous, malicious, failing to state a claim upon

8

which relief may be granted, or seeking monetary relief from a defendant immune from such

9

relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (9th Cir. 2000) (en

10

banc) (noting that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) “not only permits but requires” the court to sua sponte

11

dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that fails to state a claim).

12

“[W]hen determining whether a complaint states a claim, a court must accept as true all

13

allegations of material fact and must construe those facts in the light most favorable to the

14

plaintiff.” Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). In addition, the Court has a duty

15

to liberally construe a pro se’s pleadings, see Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles Police Dep’t, 839

16

F.2d 621, 623 (9th Cir. 1988), which is “particularly important in civil rights cases.” Ferdik v.

17

Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir. 1992).

18

The Court finds that Plaintiff’s Complaint is sufficiently pleaded to survive the sua

19

sponte screening required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b). Therefore, the Court will

20

direct U.S. Marshal service on his behalf. See Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1126-27; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d)

21

(“The officers of the court shall issue and serve all process, and perform all duties in [IFP]

22

cases.”); FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(3) (“[T]he court may order that service be made by a United States

23

marshal or deputy marshal ... if the plaintiff is authorized to proceed in forma pauperis under 28

24

U.S.C. § 1915.”). Plaintiff is cautioned, however, that “the sua sponte screening and dismissal

25

procedure is cumulative of, and not a substitute for, any subsequent Rule 12(b)(6) motion that

26

[a defendant] may choose to bring.” Teahan v. Wilhelm, 481 F. Supp. 2d 1115, 1119 (S.D. Cal.

27

2007).

28

//

I:\Everyone\_EFILE-PROSE\CAB\13cv0742-grt IFP & csl & serve.wpd, 4413

3

13cv0742 CAB (RBB)

1

IV.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

2

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

3

1.

4

Plaintiff’s Motion to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) [ECF No. 2] is

GRANTED.
2.

5

The Secretary of California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, or his

6

designee, shall collect from Plaintiff’s prison trust account the $350 balance of the filing fee

7

owed in this case by collecting monthly payments from the account in an amount equal to twenty

8

percent (20%) of the preceding month’s income and forward payments to the Clerk of the Court

9

each time the amount in the account exceeds $10 in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

10

ALL PAYMENTS SHALL BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER

11

ASSIGNED TO THIS ACTION.
3.

12

The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this Order on Jeffrey Beard,

13

Secretary, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, 1515 S Street, Suite 502,

14

Sacramento, California 95814.

15

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:

16

4.

17

Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel [ECF No. 3] is DENIED without

prejudice.
5.

18

The Clerk shall issue a summons as to Plaintiff’s Complaint [ECF No. 1] upon the

19

Defendants and shall and forward it to Plaintiff along with a blank U.S. Marshal Form 285 for

20

each Defendant. In addition, the Clerk shall provide Plaintiff with a certified copy of this Order

21

and a certified copy of his Complaint and the summons for purposes of serving the Defendants.

22

Upon receipt of this “IFP Package,” Plaintiff is directed to complete the Form 285 as completely

23

and accurately as possible, and to return it to the United States Marshal according to the

24

instructions provided by the Clerk in the letter accompanying his IFP package. Thereafter, the

25

U.S. Marshal shall serve a copy of the Complaint and summons upon the Defendants as directed

26

by Plaintiff on the USM Form 285. All costs of service shall be advanced by the United States.

27

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(3).

28

///

I:\Everyone\_EFILE-PROSE\CAB\13cv0742-grt IFP & csl & serve.wpd, 4413

4

13cv0742 CAB (RBB)

1

6.

Plaintiff shall serve upon the Defendants or, if appearance has been entered by

2

counsel, upon Defendants’ counsel, a copy of every further pleading or other document

3

submitted for consideration of the Court. Plaintiff shall include with the original paper to be

4

filed with the Clerk of the Court a certificate stating the manner in which a true and correct copy

5

of any document was served on the Defendants, or counsel for Defendants, and the date of

6

service. Any paper received by the Court which has not been filed with the Clerk or which fails

7

to include a Certificate of Service will be disregarded.

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
10

DATED: April 4, 2013

11

CATHY ANN BENCIVENGO
United States District Judge

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

I:\Everyone\_EFILE-PROSE\CAB\13cv0742-grt IFP & csl & serve.wpd, 4413

5

13cv0742 CAB (RBB)