Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-02135/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-02135-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983pr Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

13cv2135-CAB-MDD

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM ALLEN GARRETT,

Plaintiff,

v.

LAW OFFICE OF JONATHAN B. 

JORDAN, JONATHAN B. JORDAN, 

DANIEL A. VESPI,

Defendant.

Case No.: 13cv2135-CAB-MDD

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

STOP PAYING FILING FEE [Doc. 

No. 18]

On March 19, 2014, this Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma 

pauperis and dismissed the amended complaint for failing to state a claim. [Doc. No. 

15.] Judgment was entered accordingly. [Doc. No. 16.]

Four years later, on March 21, 2018, Plaintiff filed a document entitled “Petition 

for Writ of Error Coram Nobis Relief from Judgment,” which appears to be a request to 

direct prison officials at the California Men’s Colony East, where Plaintiff remains 

incarcerated, to stop collecting the $350 civil filing fee required by 28. U.S.C. §1914(a). 

[Doc. No. 18 at 2.] Plaintiff argues that the fee should be “waived or suspended in the 

interest of justice” because he feels it is unfair that the money he makes at his job in the 

prison should be applied toward the filing fee. Id. at 2-4.

Case 3:13-cv-02135-CAB-MDD Document 19 Filed 03/26/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2

13cv2135-CAB-MDD

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

When Plaintiff was granted leave to proceed IFP, he was notified that because he is 

a prisoner, he would “remain[] obligated to pay the entire [filing] fee in installments, 

regardless of whether his action [wa]s ultimately dismissed.” See March 19, 2014 Order 

[Doc. No. 15] at 2 (citing 28 U.S.C. §1915(b)(1) & (2); Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d 

844, 847 (9th Cir. 2002)).

Moreover, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) is clear as to Plaintiff’s filing fee obligations.

The statute clearly provides:

[I]f a prisoner brings a civil action or files an appeal in forma

pauperis, the prisoner shall be required to pay the full amount

of a filing fee. The court shall assess and, when funds exist,

collect, as a partial payment of any court fees required by law,

an initial partial filing fee of 20 percent of the greater of—

(A) the average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account; or

(B) the average monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for

the 6—monthly period immediately proceeding the filing of

the complaint or notice of appeal.

Id. (emphasis added).

Subsection (b)(2) further requires that:

After payment of the initial partial filing fee, the prisoner shall

be required to make monthly payments of 20 percent of the

preceding month’s income credited to the prisoner’s account.

The agency having custody of the prisoner shall forward

payments from the prisoner’s account to the clerk of the court

each time the amount in the account exceeds $10 until the

filing fees are paid.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

While “[i]n no event shall the filing fee collected exceed the amount of fees

permitted by statute for the commencement of a civil action,” id. § 1915(b)(3), and “[i]n

no event shall a prisoner be prohibited from bringing a civil action . . . for the reason that

the prisoner has no assets and no means by which to pay the initial partial filing fee,” id.

§ 1915(b)(4); see Taylor, 281 F.3d at 850 (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

Case 3:13-cv-02135-CAB-MDD Document 19 Filed 03/26/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3

13cv2135-CAB-MDD

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

to pay . . . due to the lack of funds available.”), nothing in Title 28 section 1915 provides

any further authority or mechanism by which the Court may waive the full payment of

the filing fee as required by § 1915(b)(1), or return any portion of the filing fee he has

already paid, after his civil action has been dismissed. See Adams v. Maricopa County

Sheriff’s Office, 2010 WL 4269528 at *1-2 (D. Ariz. 2010) (denying prisoner’s motion to 

stop withdrawal of monies from his trust account pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b) and

noting that “[t]he decision to file and prosecute this case was made by Plaintiff before he 

filed [his] case. Having filed [it], [he] and the Court are both statutorily limited by

the strictures of 28 U.S.C. § 1915.”).

Finally, in Taylor, the Ninth Circuit found that because § 1915(b)’s filing fee

requirements are “rationally related” to Congress’s legitimate interest in “deterring

meritless prisoner filings in the federal courts,” the statute does not violate a prisoner’s

right to meaningful access to the courts or his right to equal protection under the law.

Taylor, 281 F.3d at 848-50.

CONCLUSION

Plaintiff’s belief that assessing the filing fee against him is “unfair” is insufficient 

to waive the clear mandate of § 1915(b)’s filing fee requirements. Therefore, the motion 

to stop the collection of the filing fees is DENIED.

Dated: March 23, 2018

Case 3:13-cv-02135-CAB-MDD Document 19 Filed 03/26/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3