Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01243/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01243-2/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CURTIS MILLER,

Plaintiff,

v.

B. CATES, FAYE MONTEGRANDE, 

OLUFEMI OWOLABI, U. BANIGA,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:20-cv-1243-ADA-HBK (PC)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

RENEWED MOTION TO PROCEED IN 

FORMA PAUPERIS

(Doc. No. 28)

ORDER DIRECTING MONTHLY 

INSTALLMENT PAYMENTS TOWARD 

FILING FEE

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s renewed motion to proceed in forma pauperis

(“IFP”). (Doc. No. 28). Plaintiff, a former prisoner initiated this action while he was incarcerated 

at California Correctional Institution. (Doc. No. 1). Although currently released, Plaintiff 

remains obligated to pay the full amount of the statutory filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). As 

set forth in the Court’s July 31, 2023 Order, the total amount that remains due towards the 

$350.00 filing fee is $350.00. (Doc. No. 27 at 3). Due to Plaintiff’s release from custody, there is 

no inmate trust account from which periodic filing fees may be garnished and forwarded to the 

Court. Although the Ninth Circuit has yet to decide how a released prisoner who is obligated to 

“pay the full amount of a filing fee” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) may proceed IFP after he is

released, “the Ninth Circuit [did note] ‘even prior to the PLRA...district courts possessed 

authority under the non-PLRA-related provisions of § 1915 to require partial and/or installment 

payments.’” Makoni v. Downs, 2016 WL 7210403, at *3 (S.D. Cal. Dec. 13, 2016) (quoting 

Case 1:20-cv-01243-KES-HBK Document 29 Filed 08/28/23 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

Putzer v. Attal, 2013 WL 4519351, at *2 (D. Nev. Aug. 23, 2013)) (citing Olivares v. Marshall, 

59 F.3d 109, 111 (9th Cir. 1995)). 

Plaintiff’s renewed motion to proceed IFP makes the showing required to proceed IFP, but 

consistent with the Prison Litigation Reform Act, Plaintiff remains obligated to pay the full 

$350.00 statutory filing fee as set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Pursuant to § 1915(b)(1), the Court 

will assess a monthly installment payment of $20.00, which is less than 2% of Plaintiff’s reported 

monthly income. Plaintiff’s first installment payment will be due on October 2, 2023. Plaintiff 

shall continue to make monthly installment payments of $20.00 on or before the 2nd day of each 

succeeding month until the $350.00 filing fee is paid in full.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 

1. No later than October 2, 2023, Plaintiff shall mail to the Clerk of Court his first 

monthly installment payment of $20.00. The payment may be made by cashier’s 

check, money order, or personal check and made payable to the Clerk of Court. 

Plaintiff shall include his name and Case No. 1:20-cv-01243-ADA-HBK on the check. 

2. Plaintiff shall continue to make $20.00 monthly installment payments to the Clerk of 

Court on or before the 2nd day of each succeeding month until his $350.00 filing fee is 

paid in full. 

3. Plaintiff’s failure to timely make the $20.00 monthly installment payment will result 

in the undersigned recommending the district court dismiss this action.

Dated: August 28, 2023 

HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-01243-KES-HBK Document 29 Filed 08/28/23 Page 2 of 2