Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01001/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01001-6/pdf.json

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

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSE ARTEAGA,

Plaintiff,

v.

D. NEVE, et al.,

Defendants.

1:19-cv-01001-NONE-SKO (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

(Doc. 21)

On November 25, 2019, the Court issued an order to show cause why Plaintiff’s motion to 

proceed in forma pauperis should not be denied, given that Plaintiff had $1,186.72 in his inmate 

trust account, which is more than enough to pay the filing fee in full in this action. (Doc. 13.) 

Plaintiff filed a response on December 20, 2019, though he did not contest that he had adequate 

funds to pay the filing fee. (See Doc. 15.) Accordingly, the Court issued findings and 

recommendations to deny Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and to require Plaintiff

pay the filing fee in full within 30 days. (Doc. 17.) The findings and recommendations were 

served on Plaintiff on January 3, 2020, and provided 21 days to file objections thereto. (Id. at 2.) 

Plaintiff did not file objections within the allowable time, and District Judge Drozd adopted the 

findings and recommendations in full on February 5, 2020. (Doc. 19.)

On February 6, 2020, Plaintiff filed a document titled, “Motion to Oppositions and 

Objections to Judge and permission to proceed and permission ... to [Reconsider].” (Doc. 21.) In 

Case 1:19-cv-01001-DAD-SKO Document 23 Filed 02/10/20 Page 1 of 2
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

2

the document, Plaintiff provides reasons for why he did not file objections to the findings and 

recommendations by the prescribed deadline. (See id.) Plaintiff attached a supporting declaration, 

in which he states that he is “unable to pay the costs of [this] proceeding.” (Doc. 22). However, 

Plaintiff again does not dispute that he has sufficient funds in his inmate trust account to do just 

that. (See id.)

To the extent that Plaintiff requests the undersigned to (1) extend the deadline to file 

objections to the findings and recommendations (Doc. 17), (2) reconsider the findings and 

recommendations, or (3) grant Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, the motion (Doc. 

21) is DENIED as moot. Pursuant to the district judge’s February 5, 2020 order (Doc. 19), 

Plaintiff must pay the filing fee of $400 in full to proceed in this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 7, 2020 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-01001-DAD-SKO Document 23 Filed 02/10/20 Page 2 of 2