Case Name: Carroll Dean WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COUNTY OF VENTURA, et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-07-15
Citations: 443 F. App'x 232
Docket Number: No. 06-56442
Parties: Carroll Dean WILLIAMS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. COUNTY OF VENTURA, et al., Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 443
Pages: 232–233

Head Matter:
Carroll Dean WILLIAMS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. COUNTY OF VENTURA, et al., Defendants—Appellees.
No. 06-56442.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 12, 2011.
Filed July 15, 2011.
Carroll Dean Williams, Ventura, CA, pro se.
Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Carroll Dean Williams appeals pro se from the district court's order denying his application to pursue his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action in forma pauperis. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, Calhoun v. Stahl, 254 F.3d 845, 845 (9th Cir.2001) (per curiam), and we affirm.
Because Williams failed to provide sufficient details concerning his income, assets, and expenditures, the district court did not abuse its discretion by finding that Williams would be able to pay the filing fee. See United States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir.1981) (per curiam) (an affidavit claiming poverty in support of a motion made under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 must state the relevant facts "with some particularity, definiteness, and certainty").
Williams's remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.