Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00669/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00669-0/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

JAMES GREGORY GARCIA,

Plaintiff,

v.

RALPH M. DIAZ, et al., 

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:20-cv-0669 JLT (PC)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT 

TO ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE; AND

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

TO DENY PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO 

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

(Doc. 2)

FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this action. (Doc. 2.) His 

application reveals that he has $6,500 in cash. In addition, the certified prisoner trust fund account 

statement detailing plaintiff’s inmate account shows that, since November 2019, plaintiff has 

maintained an account balance at or above $6,400. (See Doc. 6.) 

Proceeding “in forma pauperis is a privilege not a right.” Smart v. Heinze, 347 F.2d 114, 

116 (9th Cir. 1965). While a party need not be completely destitute to proceed in forma pauperis, 

Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339-40 (1948), “the same even-handed 

care must be employed to assure that federal funds are not squandered to underwrite, at public

expense, either frivolous claims or the remonstrances of a suitor who is financially able, in whole 

or in material part, to pull his own oar.” Doe v. Educ. Enrichment Sys., No. 15cv2628-MMA 

Case 1:20-cv-00669-NODJ-CDB Document 8 Filed 05/14/20 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

(MDD), 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173063, *2 (S.D. Cal. Dec. 30, 2015) (citing Temple v. 

Ellerthorpe, 586 F. Supp. 848, 850 (D.R.I. 1984)). “[T]he court shall dismiss the case at any time 

if the court determines the allegation of poverty is untrue.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(A). It appears 

that plaintiff has had sufficient funds over the last several months to be required to pay the filing 

fee in full to proceed in this action. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the Clerk of Court to assign 

a district judge to this case; and 

The Court RECOMMENDS that plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis be 

DENIED and plaintiff be required to pay the filing fee in full before proceeding 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)(l). Within 

fourteen days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, the parties may file 

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

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are 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, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 14, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-00669-NODJ-CDB Document 8 Filed 05/14/20 Page 2 of 2