Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01757/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01757-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MAURICE HUNT,

Plaintiff,

vs.

ELANA S. LANDAU, et al., 

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:14-cv-01757-BAM

Appeal No. 15-16662

ORDER REVOKING IN FORMA 

PAUPERIS STATUS 

(ECF No. 19)

By notice entered August 24, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth 

Circuit referred this matter to the District Court for the limited purpose of determining whether 

in forma pauperis status should continue for this appeal or whether the appeal is frivolous or 

taken in bad faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); see also Hooker v. American Airlines, 302 F.3d 

1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002) (revocation of in forma pauperis status is appropriate where the 

District Court finds the appeal to be frivolous). 

Permitting litigants to proceed in forma pauperis is a privilege, not a right. Franklin v. 

Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1231 (9th Cir. 1984); Williams v. Field, 394 F.2d 329, 332 (9th Cir., 

cert. denied, 393 U.S. 891 (1968); Williams v. Marshall, 795 F.Supp. 978, 978-79 (N.D. Cal.

1992). A federal court may dismiss a claim filed in forma pauperis prior to service if it is 

satisfied that the action is frivolous or malicious. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see Sully v. Lungren, 

842 F.Supp. 1230, 1231 (N.D. Cal. 1994). If a plaintiff with in forma pauperis status brings a 

case without arguable substance in law and fact, the court may declare the case frivolous. 

Case 1:14-cv-01757-BAM Document 20 Filed 08/27/15 Page 1 of 2
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

Franklin, 745 F.2d at 1227. By its order dismissing this action, the Court found that Plaintiff’s 

constitutional claims were barred by the doctrine of Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 

(1994), because they challenge his underlying criminal conviction and sentence. The Court also 

found that Plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief was moot due to his transfer. (ECF No. 12.) 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This matter is declared frivolous;

2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), Plaintiff is not entitled to proceed in forma 

pauperis in Appeal No. 15-16662, filed August 10, 2015;

3. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(4), this Order serves as notice 

to the parties and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit of the 

finding that Plaintiff is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis for this appeal; and 

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this Order on Plaintiff and the 

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 26, 2015 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01757-BAM Document 20 Filed 08/27/15 Page 2 of 2