(PC) Hill v. Hodan

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BRIAN TRACEY HILL, Case No. 1:21-cv-01311-SKO (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND 13 v. DISREGARDING MOTION AS MOOT ELI HODAN, et al., (Docs. 3, 6) 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff has filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 18 1915. (Doc. 6.) Plaintiff adequately shows that he is unable to afford the costs of this action.1 Accordingly, his current motion to proceed IFP (Doc. 6) is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s previous motion to proceed IFP (Doc. 3) is DISREGARDED as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

23 Dated: September 27, 2021 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Plaintiff is civilly detained at Coalinga State Hospital. Persons civilly detained pursuant to California Welfare and Institutions Code § 6600, et seq., are not prisoners within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, and thus the Act’s provisions regarding in forma pauperis status of prisoner-plaintiffs do not apply to them.

28 Page v. Torrey, 201 F.3d 1136, 1140 (9th Cir. 2000).