Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00122/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00122-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 560
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner 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

GREGORY ELL SHEHEE,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

YVONNE BEUSTER, et al.,

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:14-cv-00122-LJO-BAM (PC)

NOTICE AND ORDER REVOKING IN 

FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS

(ECF No. 23)

By notice entered March 13, 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 1:14-cv-00122-LJO-BAM Document 24 Filed 03/16/15 Page 1 of 3
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. 

Here, the Magistrate Judge screened Plaintiff’s complaint and dismissed it for failure to 

state a claim. Plaintiff was granted leave to amend, but failed to file an amended complaint. As 

a result, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations that Plaintiff’s action be 

dismissed for failure to state a claim and failure to amend. Plaintiff did not file any objections 

and the Court adopted the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations in full. Despite the 

failure to amend his complaint or to file any objections, Plaintiff is now appealing dismissal of 

this action. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The appeal is declared frivolous and not taken in good faith;

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

pauperis in Appeal No. 15-15450, filed March 10, 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: March 16, 2015 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00122-LJO-BAM Document 24 Filed 03/16/15 Page 2 of 3
3

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 1:14-cv-00122-LJO-BAM Document 24 Filed 03/16/15 Page 3 of 3