Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-01412/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-01412-1/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

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

MICHAEL MANJEET SINGH, 

 Plaintiff,

 v.

PHEIFFER, et al.,

 Defendants.

Case Number 1:22-cv-01412-EPG (PC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, 

RECOMMENDING THAT PLAINTIFF’S 

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA 

PAUPERIS BE DENIED

(ECF No. 10)

OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN 

TWENTY-ONE DAYS

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO ASSIGN 

DISTRICT JUDGE

Michael Manjeet Singh (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil 

rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff sent a letter to the Clerk of Court in the Northern District of California, which 

requested the necessary forms to file a civil rights action pursuant to Section 1983. (ECF No. 

1). On, April 18, 2022, the Northern District Clerk opened this case based upon that letter, and 

mailed Plaintiff the necessary forms, including the civil complaint form and application to 

proceed in forma pauperis, along with instructions to return the forms within 28 days. (See 

ECF Nos. 3 and 4). On May 18, 2022, this case was dismissed without prejudice because the 

Court had not received a response from Plaintiff within the deadline. (ECF No. 7). 

Case 1:22-cv-01412-KES-EPG Document 24 Filed 11/07/22 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

On May 27, 2022, Plaintiff filed his complaint (ECF No. 9) and motion for leave to 

proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 10). On May 31, 2022, Plaintiff filed a letter that argued 

he had timely submitted the necessary forms within the Court’s deadline under the prisoner 

mailbox rule. (ECF No. 13). 

On November 2, 2022, District Judge Jeffrey S. White issued an order vacating 

dismissal and judgment and reopening this case. (ECF No. 19). Because Plaintiff’s complaint 

arises from an incident which occurred at Kern Valley State Prison, the case was also 

transferred to the Eastern District. (Id.)

As Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis was pending at the time of transfer, 

the Clerk of Court directed the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to 

submit a certified prison trust account statement for Plaintiff’s account. (ECF No. 22). 

II. DISCUSSION

The Court will recommend that Plaintiff’s application be denied. As Plaintiff had $13, 

485.32 in his prison trust account at the time he filed this action (ECF No. 23, p. 1), it appears 

that Plaintiff can afford to pay the filing fee for this action.

Additionally, given that Plaintiff’s account balance has been over $12,887.57 for the 

entirety of the last six months (id.), it appears that Plaintiff would be required to pay the filing 

fee in full immediately even if the Court granted Plaintiff’s application. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) 

(“Notwithstanding subsection (a), if a prisoner brings a civil action or files an appeal in forma 

pauperis, the prisoner shall be required to pay the full amount of a filing fee. The court shall 

assess and, when funds exist, collect, as a partial payment of any court fees required by law, an 

initial partial filing fee of 20 percent of the greater of-- (A) the average monthly deposits to the 

prisoner’s account; or (B) the average monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for the 6-

month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint or notice of appeal.”).

Therefore, the Court will recommend that Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma 

pauperis will be denied and that Plaintiff be required to pay the filing fee of $402.00 for this 

action in full.

//

Case 1:22-cv-01412-KES-EPG Document 24 Filed 11/07/22 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

III. CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, the Court HEREBY RECOMMENDS that:

1. Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis be DENIED; and

2. Plaintiff be directed to pay the $402.00 filing fee in full if he wants to proceed 

with this action.

These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States district 

judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within 

twenty-one (21) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff 

may file written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to 

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 

objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. 

Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 

(9th Cir. 1991)).

Additionally, IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to assign a district 

judge to this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 7, 2022 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:22-cv-01412-KES-EPG Document 24 Filed 11/07/22 Page 3 of 3