Opinion
1:21-cv-00855-SKO (PC)
06-17-2021
DOMINIQUE ZAFIR CASEY, Plaintiff, v. HADDAD, et al., Defendants.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
(Doc. 2)
14-DAY DEADLINE
SHEILA K. OBERTO, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Dominque Zafir Casey is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this action. On May 27, 2021, Plaintiff filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Doc. 2.) According to the inmate trust account statement submitted by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Plaintiff had more than $1,000 in his trust account as of March 4, 2021, and approximately $470 as of May 19, 2021, (Doc. 6). This is enough to pay the $402 filing fee for this action. Therefore, the Court issued an order to show cause why Plaintiff's motion to proceed IFP should not be denied. (Doc. 8.) In his response to the order, Plaintiff states that he misunderstood the purpose of the IFP application, and that he believed it “was an agreement . . . to take the money” for the filing fee from his account. (Doc. 9.)
Plaintiff also requests that the Court deduct the filing fee from his inmate trust account. (Doc. 9.) However, the Court does not arrange for the payment of filing fees. Plaintiff must arrange for payment of the fee with the appropriate prison personnel.
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. 15-cv-2628-MMA-MDD, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173063, *2 (S.D. Cal. 2015) (citation omitted).
Plaintiff has adequate funds to pay the filing fee for this action in full. Accordingly, the Court RECOMMENDS that his motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) be DENIED. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to assign a district judge to this action.
These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within 14 days of the date of service of these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned, “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may result in 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.