Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05466/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05466-20/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 The section entitled “Certificate” was not filled out by a prison official and the application was not 1

accompanied by a certified copy of plaintiff’s trust account statement. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2).

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DONALD GLASS,

Plaintiff,

v.

R. BEER, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:04-cv-05466-OWW-SMS PC

ORDER VACATING ORDER DENYING

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS

(Doc. 155) 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON

APPEAL

(Doc. 154)

Plaintiff Donald Glass (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 21, 2007, plaintiff filed a motion seeking leave to

proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 154.) On June 25, 2007, the Court denied the motion because it

appeared to be moot as to this action and premature as to any appeal. (Doc. 155.) At the time, the

Court was not aware that plaintiff had also submitted a notice of appeal for filing. (Doc. 156.) In

light of the fact that it is now apparent plaintiff was seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis on

appeal, the Court’s order of June 25, 2007, shall be vacated. 

However, plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is incomplete. In addition, 1

plaintiff is attempting to appeal two discovery orders, neither of which is final and appealable at this

///

Case 1:04-cv-05466-OWW -SMS Document 159 Filed 07/03/07 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

time. See U.S. v. Fei Ye, 436 F.3d 1117, 1122 (9th Cir. 2006) (discovery orders generally

interlocutory and nonappealable). The appeal is therefore not in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).

For these reasons, plaintiff’s motion shall be denied.

Based on the foregoing, the Court’s order of June 25, 2007, is VACATED, and plaintiff’s

motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 2, 2007 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05466-OWW -SMS Document 159 Filed 07/03/07 Page 2 of 2