Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00809/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00809-5/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

ANTHONY NGUYEN,

Plaintiff,

v.

BITER, M.D., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:11-cv-00809-OWW-SKO PC 

ORDER ADDRESSING PLAINTIFF’S

OBJECTION AND CLARIFYING PREVIOUS

ORDER CONCERNING IN FORMA

PAUPERIS APPLICATION DEFICIENCY

(Docs. 7 and 19)

Plaintiff Anthony Nguyen, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on May 18, 2011. On May 20, 2011, the Court issued an order

requiring Plaintiff to either file an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the $350.00 filing

fee in full, and on June 13, 2011, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to

comply, which was filed on June 9, 2011.

On June 10, 2011, Plaintiff filed an objection to the May 20 order. There is no provision for

“objecting” to the order at issue, but in light of the fact that the Court’s earlier order was not clear

as to the deficiency at issue, Plaintiff’s objection shall be addressed and the order is clarified as

follows.

Plaintiff filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis on May 18, 2011. The application

Plaintiff filed was not on a form accepted by this division in that it lacked the requisite authorization

1

Case 1:11-cv-00809-AWI-SKO Document 21 Filed 06/15/11 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

for the deduction of the filing fee from Plaintiff’s trust account, when funds are available. Plaintiff 1

was provided with the correct form, which he must complete and return. Plaintiff’s first application

was accompanied by a certified copy of his trust account statement and therefore, Plaintiff is not

required to submit another trust account statement. Plaintiff need only fill out the application and

return it. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s objection is HEREBY DEEMED ADDRESSED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 15, 2011 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

i0d3h8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The in forma pauperis statute does not authorize a fee waiver. It merely provides that prisoners may

1

proceed without prepayment of the filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). The filing fee is still assessed and it must be

collected when funds exist. Id.

2

Case 1:11-cv-00809-AWI-SKO Document 21 Filed 06/15/11 Page 2 of 2