(PC) Reynolds v. Gomez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FERDINAND REYNOLDS, Case No. 2:95-cv-01451-JAM-JDP (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO BE EXCUSED FROM PAYING THE v. FILING FEE

THEODORE WHITE, et al., ECF No. 279

Defendants.

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding without counsel and in forma pauperis, commenced this action in 1995. ECF No. 1. In 2001, plaintiff’s claims were dismissed following a bench trial, and judgment was entered accordingly. ECF Nos. 199 & 200. The Ninth Circuit subsequently vacated the judgment and remanded the case to determine whether plaintiff waived his right to a jury trial. ECF No. 218. In August 2007, after conducting an evidentiary hearing, the court reinstated the March 2001 judgment. ECF Nos. 261 & 262.

Approximately twelve years later, plaintiff filed a motion requesting that he be excused from paying the outstanding balance of the filing fee due to “financial strain.”1 ECF No. 279. The Prison Litigation Reform Act requires that all prisoners proceeding in forma pauperis pay the full amount of the filing fee, although payments can be made in increments. Williams v. Paramo, This case was recently reassigned to the undersigned and District Judge John. A.

Mendez. ECF No. 280. 775 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir. 2015); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) & (2); Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d 844, 847 (9th Cir. 2002) (“Under the PLRA, all prisoners who file IFP civil actions must pay the full amount of the filing fee.”’).

Accordingly, plaintiff remains obligated to pay the entire filing fee, and his motion, ECF No. 279, is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _ September 29, 2021 Q_——.

JEREMY D. PETERSON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE