Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01449/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01449-1/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

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PAUL A. TURNER,

Plaintiff,

v.

CASTILLO, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:23-cv-01449-NODJ-BAM (PC)

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISPUTE 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2)

(ECF No. 15)

Plaintiff Paul A. Turner (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Dispute 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2), filed 

December 29, 2023, which the Court construes as a motion for relief from the filing fee. (ECF 

No. 15.) In his motion, Plaintiff states that money is being withdrawn from his account more than 

three times a month, and 20 percent does not seem accurate to his account. Plaintiff has attached 

a recent copy of his inmate trust account statement showing withdrawals made during the month 

of December 2023. (Id. at 3.)

Plaintiff is advised that CDCR’s deductions from his inmate trust account were properly 

made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2) and the Supreme Court’s decision in Bruce v. 

Samuels, 577 U.S. 82 (2016). In Bruce, the Supreme Court held that “monthly installment 

payments, like the initial partial payment, are to be assessed on a per-case basis” and that 

Case 1:23-cv-01449-KES-BAM Document 17 Filed 01/10/24 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

“simultaneous, not sequential, recoupment of multiple filing fees” is required by 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(b)(2). Id. at 85, 87. The trust statement attached to Plaintiff’s motion shows that on 

December 1, 2023, a withdrawal of $48.02 was made for the filing fee in the instant action, 1:23-

CV-01449-BAM, and another withdrawal of $38.02 was made for Case No. 1:23-CV-01447-

CDB. (ECF No. 15, p. 3.) As shown in the “Obligation List” portion of the trust statement, it 

appears Plaintiff currently owes a balance towards the filing fees in both of these actions. (Id.) 

Therefore, the simultaneous deductions from Plaintiff’s inmate trust account to pay multiple 

outstanding filing fees were lawful and properly made. As such, no relief from CDCR’s 

deduction of funds from Plaintiff’s trust account is warranted.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to dispute 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2), requesting relief from 

filing fees, (ECF No. 15), is HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 9, 2024 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:23-cv-01449-KES-BAM Document 17 Filed 01/10/24 Page 2 of 2