Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_14-cv-00965/USCOURTS-casd-3_14-cv-00965-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983pr 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES MAXWELL GREEN,

CDCR #F-16348,

Civil No. 14cv0965 LAB (BGS)

Plaintiff, ORDER:

(1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO PROCEED 

IN FORMA PAUPERIS

[Doc. No. 2] 

AND

(2) DIRECTING U.S. MARSHAL

TO EFFECT SERVICE OF

COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO

FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(3) AND 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(d)

vs.

DIRECTOR/SECRETARY, CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

AND REHABILITATION; D. PARAMO,

Warden; W. EDROZO, Correctional

Officer; R. JOHNSON, Correctional

Officer; A. ALANIZ, Correctional Officer;

WHITING, Correctional Sgt.; DAVIS,

Correctional Lt.; JOHN and JANE DOES,

Defendants.

James Maxwell Green (“Plaintiff”), who is currently incarcerated at Richard J.

Donovan Correctional Facility (“RJD”) in San Diego, California, and proceeding pro se,

has filed a civil rights complaint (“Compl.) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc No. 1). 

Plaintiff claims Defendants have violated his right to free exercise of his Native

American religion by denying him “access to a sweat lodge and/or place” in which to

practice his faith, and have “intimidated [him] with acts of violence” and subjected him

I:\Everyone\_EFILE-PROSE\LAB\14cv0965-grt-IFP&serve.wpd 1 14cv0965 LAB (BGS)

Case 3:14-cv-00965-LAB-BGS Document 3 Filed 08/29/14 Page 1 of 6
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

to “racial discrimination” and “harassment” by “placing him in a cage” and confiscating

religious items he claims are necessary to his religious practice. See Compl. at 3-5. He

seeks injunctive relief as well as “further damages of [the] cost of . . . filing.” Id. at 6.

Plaintiff has not prepaid the civil filing fee; instead he has filed a Motion to

Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) (Doc. No. 2). 

I. MOTION TO PROCEED IFP

All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a district court of the

United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of

$400. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to

1

prepay the entire fee only if he is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a). See Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). However, a

prisoner granted leave to proceed IFP remains obligated to pay the entire fee in

installments, regardless of whether his action is ultimately dismissed. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(b)(1) & (2); Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d 844, 847 (9th Cir. 2002).

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, as amended by the Prison Litigation Reform Act

(“PLRA”), a prisoner seeking leave to proceed IFP must submit a “certified copy of the

trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the prisoner for the sixmonth period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a)(2); Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1119 (9th Cir. 2005). From the certified

trust account statement, the Court assesses an initial payment of 20% of (a) the average

monthly deposits in the account for the past six months, or (b) the average monthly

balance in the account for the past six months, whichever is greater, unless the prisoner

has no assets. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4). The institution

having custody of the prisoner then collects subsequent payments, assessed at 20% of

the preceding month’s income, in any month in which the prisoner’s account exceeds

In addition to the $350 statutory fee, all parties filing civil actions on or after 1

May 1, 2013, must pay an additional administrative fee of $50. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a)

(Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees, District Court Misc. Fee Schedule) (eff. May 1,

2013). However, the additional $50 administrative fee is waived if the plaintiff is

granted leave to proceed IFP. Id.

I:\Everyone\_EFILE-PROSE\LAB\14cv0965-grt-IFP&serve.wpd 2 14cv0965 LAB (BGS)

Case 3:14-cv-00965-LAB-BGS Document 3 Filed 08/29/14 Page 2 of 6
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

$10, and forwards those payments to the Court until the entire filing fee is paid. See 28

U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

In support of his IFP Motion, Plaintiff has submitted a certified copy of his trust

account statement pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) and S.D. CAL. CIVLR 3.2. 

Andrews, 398 F.3d at 1119. The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s trust account statement,

as well asthe attached prison certificate issued by an accounting trainee at RJD verifying

his available balances, and has determined that while he has had an average monthly

balance of $13.73 in his account for the 6-month period preceding the filing of this

action, Plaintiff has no available funds from which to pay an initial partial filing fee at

this time. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4) (providing that “[i]n no event shall a prisoner be

prohibited from bringing a civil action or appealing a civil action or criminal judgment

for the reason that the prisoner has no assets and no means by which to pay the initial

partial filing fee.”); Taylor, 281 F.3d at 850 (finding that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4) acts as

a “safety-valve” preventing dismissal of a prisoner’s IFP case based solely on a “failure

to pay . . . due to the lack of funds available to him when payment is ordered.”). 

Therefore, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP (Doc. No. 2) and

assesses no initial partialfiling fee per 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). However, the entire $350

balance of the filing fees mandated will be collected by the CDCR and forwarded to the

Clerk of the Court pursuant to the installment payment provisions set forth in 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(b)(1).

II. SCREENING PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) & 1915A(b)

The PLRA also requires that the Court review complaints filed by all persons

proceeding IFP and by those, like Plaintiff, who are “incarcerated or detained in any

facility [and] accused of, sentenced for, or adjudicated delinquent for, violations of

criminal law or the terms or conditions of parole, probation, pretrial release, or

diversionary program,” “as soon as practicable after docketing.” See 28 U.S.C.

§§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b). Under these statutes, the Court must sua sponte dismiss

complaints, or any portions thereof, which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim,

I:\Everyone\_EFILE-PROSE\LAB\14cv0965-grt-IFP&serve.wpd 3 14cv0965 LAB (BGS)

Case 3:14-cv-00965-LAB-BGS Document 3 Filed 08/29/14 Page 3 of 6
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

or which seek damages from defendants who are immune. See 28 U.S.C.

§§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A; Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (9th Cir. 2000)

(en banc) (§ 1915(e)(2)); Rhodes v. Robinson, 621 F.3d 1002, 1004 (9th Cir. 2010)

(discussing 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)).

“[W]hen determining whether a complaint states a claim, a court must accept as

true all allegations of material fact and must construe those facts in the light most

favorable to the plaintiff.” Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000); see also

Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (noting that § 1915(e)(2)

“parallelsthe language of FederalRule ofCivil Procedure 12(b)(6)”). In addition, courts

“have an obligation where the petitioner is pro se, particularly in civil rights cases, to

construe the pleadings liberally and to afford the petitioner the benefit of any doubt.” 

Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 & n.7 (9th Cir. 2010) (citing Bretz v. Kelman, 773

F.2d 1026, 1027 n.1 (9th Cir. 1985)). The court may not, however, “supply essential

elements of claims that were not initially pled.” Ivey v. Board of Regents of the

University of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). 

As currently pleaded, the Court finds Plaintiff’s free exercise of religion claims

are sufficient to survive the sua sponte screening required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)

and 1915A(b). See Shakur v. Schriro, 514 F.3d 878, 884-85 (9th Cir. 2008) (a 2

prisoner’s First Amendment right to free exercise is triggered when prison officials are

alleged to have substantially burden the practice of an inmate’s religion by preventing

him from engaging in conduct which he sincerely believes is consistent with his faith)

(citing Malik v. Brown, 16 F.3d 330, 333 (9th Cir. 1994)). 

Accordingly, the Court will direct U.S. Marshal service on Plaintiff’s behalf. See

28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (“The officers of the court shall issue and serve all process, and

perform all duties in [IFP] cases.”); FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(3) (“[T]he court may order that

Plaintiff is cautioned that “the sua sponte screening and dismissal procedure is 2

cumulative of, and not a substitute for, any subsequent Rule 12(b)(6) motion that [a

defendant] may choose to bring.” Teahan v. Wilhelm, 481 F. Supp. 2d 1115, 1119 (S.D.

Cal. 2007). 

I:\Everyone\_EFILE-PROSE\LAB\14cv0965-grt-IFP&serve.wpd 4 14cv0965 LAB (BGS)

Case 3:14-cv-00965-LAB-BGS Document 3 Filed 08/29/14 Page 4 of 6
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

service be made by a United States marshal or deputy marshal . . . if the plaintiff is

authorized to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.”).

III. CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) (Doc. No.

2) is GRANTED.

2. The Secretary of the CDCR, or his designee, shall collect from Plaintiff’s

prison trust account the $350 filing fee owed in this case by collecting monthly payments

from the account in an amount equal to twenty percent (20%) of the preceding month’s

income and forward payments to the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in the

account exceeds $10 in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). ALL PAYMENTS

SHALL BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED

TO THIS ACTION.

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this Order on Jeffrey

A. Beard, Secretary, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, P.O. Box

942883, Sacramento, California, 94283-0001.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:

4. The Clerk is DIRECTED to issue a summons as to Plaintiff’s Complaint

(Doc. No. 1) upon Defendants and forward it to Plaintiff along with a blank U.S. Marshal

Form 285 for each Defendant. In addition, the Clerk is directed provide Plaintiff with

a certified copy of this Order and a certified copy of his Complaint (Doc. No. 1) and the

summons so that he may serve each named Defendant. Upon receipt of this “IFP

Package,” Plaintiff is directed to complete the Form 285s as completely and accurately

as possible, and to return them to the United States Marshal according to the instructions

provided by the Clerk in the letter accompanying his IFP package. Upon receipt, the

U.S. Marshal is ORDERED to serve a copy of the Complaint and summons upon each

Defendant as directed by Plaintiff on the USM Form 285s. All costs of service will be

advanced by the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(3).

I:\Everyone\_EFILE-PROSE\LAB\14cv0965-grt-IFP&serve.wpd 5 14cv0965 LAB (BGS)

Case 3:14-cv-00965-LAB-BGS Document 3 Filed 08/29/14 Page 5 of 6
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

5. Defendants are thereafter ORDERED to reply to Plaintiff’s Complaint

within the time provided by the applicable provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

12(a). See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(g)(2) (while a defendant may occasionally be permitted

to “waive the right to reply to any action brought by a prisoner confined in any jail,

prison, or other correctional facility under section 1983,” once the Court has conducted

its sua sponte screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and § 1915A(b), and thus,

has made a preliminary determination based on the face on the pleading alone that

Plaintiff has a “reasonable opportunity to prevail on the merits,” the defendant isrequired

to respond).

6. Plaintiff must serve upon the Defendants or, if appearance has been entered

by counsel, upon Defendants’ counsel, a copy of every further pleading or other

document submitted for consideration by the Court. Plaintiff must include with the

original paper to be filed with the Clerk of the Court a certificate stating the manner in

which a true and correct copy of the document was served on Defendants, or counsel for

Defendants, and the date ofsuch service. Any paper received by the Court which has not

been filed with the Clerk or which fails to include a Certificate of Service will be

disregarded.

DATED: August 29, 2014

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge

I:\Everyone\_EFILE-PROSE\LAB\14cv0965-grt-IFP&serve.wpd 6 14cv0965 LAB (BGS)

Case 3:14-cv-00965-LAB-BGS Document 3 Filed 08/29/14 Page 6 of 6