Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-01109/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-01109-0/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

K:\COMMON\BURNS\_ATTENTION - SIGNED ORDERS\07cv1109 Deny IFP.wpd -1- 07cv1109

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RENE DE LIVA PALACIOS, 

BOP #03562-298,

Civil No. 07-1109 LAB (NLS)

Plaintiff, ORDER: 

(1) DENYING MOTION TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

[Doc. No. 2]; 

(2) DENYING MOTION TO

APPOINT COUNSEL PURSUANT

TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) 

[Doc. No. 3]; 

(3) DENYING MOTION FOR

JUDICIAL INQUIRY [Doc. No. 4];

and

(4) DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT

PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) 

vs.

UNKNOWN NAMED OFFICERS 1

THROUGH 5; NATIONAL CITY POLICE

DEPARTMENT,

Defendants.

Plaintiff, Rene De Liva Palacios, a federal prisoner currently incarcerated at the

Metropolitan Correctional Center in San Diego, California, and proceeding pro se, hassubmitted

a civil rights Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. In his Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that

several National City Police Officers allowed a police dog to attack Plaintiff after he had

submitted to their orders to stop and drop to the ground. (See Compl. at 3.) As a result, Plaintiff

alleges that he suffered serious leg wounds. (Id.)

////

Case 3:07-cv-01109-LAB-NLS Document 5 Filed 08/20/07 Page 1 of 4
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

K:\COMMON\BURNS\_ATTENTION - SIGNED ORDERS\07cv1109 Deny IFP.wpd -2- 07cv1109

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. 2], a Motion for Appointment of Counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) [Doc.

No. 3]; and a “Motion for Judicial Inquiry” [Doc. No. 4].

I. Motion to Proceed IFP [Doc. No. 2]

Effective April 9, 2006, 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 in forma pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes, 2007 WL 1815499 (9th Cir. June 26, 2007), as amended,

2007 WL 1932824 at *3, ___ F.3d ___ (9th Cir. July 5, 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).

Prisoners seeking leave to proceed IFP must also submit a “certified copy of the trust fund

account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the prisoner for the 6-month period

immediately preceding the filing of the complaint....” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). From the

certified trust account statement, the Court must assess an initial payment of 20% of (a) the

average monthly deposits in the account for the past six months, or (b) the average monthly

balance in the account for the past six months, whichever is greater, unless the prisoner has no

assets. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), (4); see also Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d 844, 850 (9th

Cir. 2002). Thereafter, the institution having custody of the prisoner must collect subsequent

payments, assessed at 20% of the preceding month’s income, in any month in which the

prisoner’s account exceeds $10, and forward those payments to the Court until the entire filing

fee is paid. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

While Plaintiff has filed a Motion to Proceed IFP in this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a), he has not attached a certified copy of his prison trust account statement for the 6-

month period immediately preceding the filing of his Complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2);

Case 3:07-cv-01109-LAB-NLS Document 5 Filed 08/20/07 Page 2 of 4
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

K:\COMMON\BURNS\_ATTENTION - SIGNED ORDERS\07cv1109 Deny IFP.wpd -3- 07cv1109

S.D. CAL. CIVLR 3.2. Section 1915(a)(2) clearly mandates that prisoners “seeking to bring a

civil action ...without prepayment of fees ... shall submit a certified copy of the trust fund

account statement (or institutional equivalent) ... for the 6-month period immediately preceding

the filing of the complaint.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) (emphasis added). 

Without Plaintiff’s trust account statement, the Court is simply unable to assess the

appropriate amount of the filing fee required to initiate this action. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).

Therefore, Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP must be DENIED.

II. Motion for Appointment of Counsel [Doc. No. 3]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

viewed together before reaching a decision.” Id. (quoting Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328,

1331 (9th Cir. 1986)).

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

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

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

III. Conclusion and Order

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

(1) Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1)

[Doc. No. 3] and Motion for Judicial Inquiry [Doc. No. 4] is DENIED;

////

////

Case 3:07-cv-01109-LAB-NLS Document 5 Filed 08/20/07 Page 3 of 4
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

K:\COMMON\BURNS\_ATTENTION - SIGNED ORDERS\07cv1109 Deny IFP.wpd -4- 07cv1109

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:

(2) Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP [Doc. No. 2] is DENIED.

(3) This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to prepay the $350 filing

fee mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), and for failure to successfully move to proceed IFP

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 

(4) Plaintiff if GRANTED forty five (45) days from the date this Order is Filed to

either: (1) pay the entire $350 filing fee, or (2) file a new Motion to Proceed IFP, which

includes a certified copy of his trust account statement for the 6-month period preceding the

filing of his Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) and S.D. CAL. CIVLR 3.2(b). 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall provide Plaintiff with a

Court-approved form “Motion and Declaration in Support of Motion to Proceed IFP” in this

matter. If Plaintiff neither pays the $350 filing fee in full nor sufficiently completes and files

the attached Motion to Proceed IFP, together with a certified copy of his prison trust account

statement within 45 days, this action shall remained closed without further Order of the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 19, 2007

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-01109-LAB-NLS Document 5 Filed 08/20/07 Page 4 of 4