Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-01310/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-01310-5/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL AARON WITKIN,

Plaintiff,

v.

R. THOMAS,

Defendant.

No. 2:22-cv-01310 DJC DB P

ORDER

Plaintiff, a former state prisoner, proceeds without counsel in an action brought under 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. On February 28, 2023, plaintiff was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis

(“IFP”). See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

On September 11, 2023, defendants filed a motion to revoke plaintiff’s IFP status. (ECF 

No. 23.) Defendants argue plaintiff made false allegations of poverty, and in addition, that his 

financial circumstances have improved. (ECF No. 23.) Defendants also seek to have the case 

dismissed as malicious under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). (Id.) The motion is fully briefed. For 

the reasons set forth below, the court orders plaintiff to submit, within 21 days of the date of this 

order, an Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long Form)

(“AO 239”).1

1 This form is available at https://www.uscourts.gov/forms/fee-waiver-applicationforms/application-proceed-district-court-without-prepaying-fees-or.

Case 2:22-cv-01310-DJC-SCR Document 30 Filed 11/27/23 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

“IFP status may be acquired or lost during the course of the litigation, and the court may 

waive or order payment of costs for any of the benefits that may arise under the statute.”

Stehouwer v. Hennessey, 841 F. Supp. 316, 321 (N.D. Cal. 1994), aff’d in part, vacated in part on 

other grounds sub nom. Olivares v. Marshall, 59 F.3d 109 (9th Cir. 1995); see also Evans v. 

Croom, 650 F.2d 521, 525 n. 12 (4th Cir. 1981). The court may revoke plaintiff’s IFP status “if 

there is sufficient evidence that plaintiff’s financial condition has improved to the point that 

plaintiff’s economic situation is no longer a significant barrier to maintaining the action.” Murphy 

v. Jones, 801 F. Supp. 283, 289 (E.D. Mo. 1992); see also Carter v. Telectron, Inc., 452 F. Supp. 

939, 942 (S.D. Tex. 1976) (“if the allegation of poverty is no longer true because of a subsequent 

improvement in the economic status of plaintiff, it is within the authority of this Court to dismiss 

the proceeding... or... require that the costs of the litigation to date be paid by plaintiff in lieu of 

dismissal” (internal citations omitted)).

In accordance with the above, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. Within 21 days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall submit a fully completed 

and signed Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long 

Form) (“AO 239”).

2. Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to submit a fully completed and signed AO 239 

form will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to obey a court 

order.

Dated: November 27, 2023

DLB7

witk1310.ifp.long

Case 2:22-cv-01310-DJC-SCR Document 30 Filed 11/27/23 Page 2 of 2