Hawkins v. Kim
Hawkins v. Kim
Trial Court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRISTOPHER TODD HAWKINS, Case No.: 3:22-cv-1468 BTM AHG Inmate Booking No. 22723786, 12 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO Plaintiff, 13 PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS v. AND DISMISSING CIVIL ACTION 14 WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR ANGELA KIM; RICHARD WRIGHT; 15 FAILURE TO PREPAY JOSE VELASQUEZ; MARIA HUMES; FILING FEES 16 ADAM DEVOR; TRAN HAHN,
17 Defendants. [ECF No. 2] 18 19 20 Plaintiff Christopher Todd Hawkins, currently housed at the San Diego Central Jail 21 located in San Diego, California, and proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights complaint 22 pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983. (See Compl., ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff did not pay the filing 23 fee required by
28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) to commence a civil action when he filed his 24 Complaint; instead, he filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 25
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) (ECF No. 2). 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / / 1 I. Motion to Proceed IFP 2 All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a district court of the 3 United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of 4 $402. See
28 U.S.C. § 1914(a).1 The action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to 5 prepay the entire fee only if he is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 6 § 1915(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes,
493 F.3d 1047, 1051(9th Cir. 2007); Rodriguez v. 7 Cook,
169 F.3d 1176, 1177(9th Cir. 1999). However, a prisoner granted leave to 8 proceed IFP remains obligated to pay the entire fee in “increments” or “installments,” 9 Bruce v. Samuels,
577 U.S. 82, 83–84 (2016); Williams v. Paramo,
775 F.3d 1182, 1185 10 (9th Cir. 2015), and regardless of whether his action is ultimately dismissed. See 28
11 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) & (2); Taylor v. Delatoore,
281 F.3d 844, 847(9th Cir. 2002). 12 Section 1915(a)(2) requires prisoners seeking leave to proceed IFP to submit a 13 “certified copy of the trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for . . . the 14 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint.” 28 U.S.C. 15 § 1915(a)(2); Andrews v. King,
398 F.3d 1113, 1119(9th Cir. 2005). From the certified 16 trust account statement, the Court assesses an initial payment of 20% of (a) the average 17 monthly deposits in the account for the past six months, or (b) the average monthly 18 balance in the account for the past six months, whichever is greater, unless the prisoner 19 has no assets. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1);
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4). The institution 20 having custody of the prisoner then collects subsequent payments, assessed at 20% of the 21 preceding month’s income, in any month in which his account exceeds $10, and forwards 22 those payments to the Court until the entire filing fee is paid. See 28 U.S.C. 23 § 1915(b)(2); Bruce, 577 U.S. at 84‒85. 24 25 26 1 In addition to the $350 statutory fee, civil litigants must pay an additional administrative 27 fee of $52. See
28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) (Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees, District Court Misc. Fee Schedule, § 14 (eff. Dec. 1, 2020). The additional $52 administrative fee does 28 1 While Plaintiff has filed a Motion to Proceed IFP, he has not attached a certified 2 copy of his Inmate Statement Report for the 6-month period immediately preceding the 3 filing of his Complaint. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2); S.D. Cal. CivLR 3.2. Section 4 1915(a)(2) requires prisoners “seeking to bring a civil action . . . without prepayment of 5 fees . . . [to] submit a certified copy of the trust fund account statement (or institutional 6 equivalent) . . . for the 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of the 7 complaint.”
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) (emphasis added). Without these certified trust 8 account statements, the Court cannot assess the appropriate amount of the initial filing fee 9 which may be statutorily required to initiate the prosecution of this case. See 28 U.S.C. 10 § 1915(b)(1). 11 II. Conclusion and Order 12 Accordingly, the Court: 13 (1) DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP (ECF No. 2) and DISMISSES 14 the action without prejudice for failure to prepay the $402 civil filing fee required by 28
15 U.S.C. § 1914(a); 16 (2) GRANTS Plaintiff forty-five (45) days from the date this Order in which to 17 re-open his case by either: (a) prepaying the entire $402 civil filing and administrative 18 fee in one lump-sum; or (b) filing a renewed Motion to Proceed IFP, which includes a 19 prison certificate, signed by a San Diego Central Jail trust accounting official attesting as 20 to his trust account balances and deposits, and/or a certified copy of his Inmate Statement 21 Report for the 6-month period preceding the filing of his Complaint pursuant to 28
22 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) and S.D. Cal. CivLR 3.2(b); and 23 / / / 24 / / / 25 / / / 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / / 1 (3) DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to mail Plaintiff a Court-approved form 2 “Motion and Declaration in Support of Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis” for his use 3 convenience. If Plaintiff neither pays the $402 civil filing fee in full nor sufficiently 4 ||completes and files a renewed Motion to Proceed IFP with a certified copy of his 6- 5 ||month trust account statements within 45 days, this case will remain dismissed without 6 || prejudice pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), and without further Order of the Court. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 || Dated: October 13, 2022 9 □□ Honorable Barry Ted Moskov 10 United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Reference
- Status
- Unknown