Rivera v. Clark
ORDER Granting 5 Motion to Enlarge Time to Satisfy the Filing Fee Requirement and Granting 6 Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 1/6/21. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dlg)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
RICKEY V. RIVERA,
Case No.: 20cv1831-GPC (RBM)
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
ENLARGE TIME TO SATISFY THE
FILING FEE REQUIREMENT AND
GRANTING MOTION TO
PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
KEN CLARK, Warden,
On September 9, 2020, Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, constructively
filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.1 (ECF No. 1.)
On September 17, 2010, the Court dismissed this action because Petitioner had failed to
pay the $5.00 filing fee or submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 2.)
Petitioner was instructed that to have this action reopened he was required to pay the filing
fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis by November 17, 2020. (Id. at 1.)
Petitioner filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis on November 16, 2020. (ECF
No. 3.) On November 17, 2020, the Court denied the motion because it did not include the
Petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the “mailbox” rule which provides that his pro se
filings are considered to have been constructively filed as of the date they are handed to
prison authorities for mailing to a court. Anthony v. Cambra, 236 F.3d 568, 574-75 (9th
required certified copy of his inmate trust account statement. (ECF No. 4.) The Court
extended the time to file a properly supported in forma pauperis application until December
17, 2020. (Id. at 2.) On December 16, 2020, Petitioner constructively filed a request for
extension of time based on a delay in obtaining trust account statements due to the ongoing
pandemic. (ECF No. 5.) Petitioner constructively filed a renewed motion to proceed in
forma pauperis on December 18, 2020, accompanied by a certified copy of his trust account
statement. (ECF No. 6.)
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
For good cause shown, and because Petitioner’s renewed motion to proceed in forma
pauperis was constructively filed only one day late, the Court GRANTS Petitioner’s
motion for an extension of time to satisfy the filing fee requirement.
MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
Petitioner has $0.75 on account at the California correctional institution in which he
is presently confined (ECF No. 6 at 2, 4), and cannot afford the $5.00 filing fee. Thus, the
Court GRANTS Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and allows him to
prosecute the above-referenced action without being required to prepay fees or costs and
without being required to post security.
CONCLUSION AND ORDER
Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Petitioner’s motion for an extension of time to
satisfy the filing fee requirement (ECF No. 5) and GRANTS Petitioner’s motion to proceed
in forma pauperis (ECF No. 6).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 6, 2021
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?