Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00432/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00432-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1983 Civil Rights

---

1

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

MANUEL PEREZ,

Plaintiff,

vs.

LISA A. SMITTCAMP,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:15-cv-00432-BAM

Appeal No. 15-17474

ORDER REVOKING IN FORMA 

PAUPERIS STATUS 

(Doc. 24)

By notice entered December 22, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth 

Circuit referred this matter to the District Court for the limited purpose of determining whether 

in forma pauperis status should continue for this appeal or whether the appeal is frivolous or 

taken in bad faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); see also Hooker v. American Airlines, 302 F.3d 

1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002) (revocation of in forma pauperis status is appropriate where the 

District Court finds the appeal to be frivolous). 

Permitting litigants to proceed in forma pauperis is a privilege, not a right. Franklin v. 

Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1231 (9th Cir. 1984); Williams v. Field, 394 F.2d 329, 332 (9th Cir., 

cert. denied, 393 U.S. 891 (1968); Williams v. Marshall, 795 F.Supp. 978, 978-79 (N.D. Cal.

1992). A federal court may dismiss a claim filed in forma pauperis prior to service if it is 

satisfied that the action is frivolous or malicious. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see Sully v. Lungren, 

842 F.Supp. 1230, 1231 (N.D. Cal. 1994). If a plaintiff with in forma pauperis status brings a 

Case 1:15-cv-00432-BAM Document 25 Filed 12/23/15 Page 1 of 2
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

case without arguable substance in law and fact, the court may declare the case frivolous. 

Franklin, 745 F.2d at 1227. 

On August 21, 2015, the Court screened Plaintiff’s pro se complaint and dismissed it with 

leave to amend. (Doc. 13.) Despite multiple opportunities and extensions of time, Plaintiff 

failed to file an amended complaint. Accordingly, on November 24, 2015, the Court dismissed 

this action based on Plaintiff’s failure to obey a court order. (Doc. 19.) The Court had warned 

Plaintiff repeatedly that failure to file an amended complaint would result in dismissal of this 

action. Plaintiff’s appeal of the Court’s dismissal, which resulted from Plaintiff’s own inaction, 

is therefore frivolous. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This matter is declared frivolous;

2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), Plaintiff is not entitled to proceed in forma 

pauperis in Appeal No. 15-17474, filed December 3, 2015;

3. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(4), this Order serves as notice 

to the parties and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit of the 

finding that Plaintiff is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis for this appeal; and 

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this Order on Plaintiff and the 

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 23, 2015 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00432-BAM Document 25 Filed 12/23/15 Page 2 of 2