1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 ANJALI WARD, et al., Case No. 19-cv-00183-JST

8 Plaintiffs, ORDER RE: IN FORMA PAUPERIS 9 v. STATUS ON APPEAL

10 JUDITH ELIZABETH LAWRENCE, et al., Re: ECF Nos. 206, 209 Defendants. 11

12 13 Plaintiffs Anjali Ward and Lila Cast have filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis on 14 appeal. ECF No. 206. In addition, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has referred the matter to 15 this Court “for the limited purpose of determining whether in forma pauperis status should 16 continue for this appeal or whether the appeal is frivolous or taken in bad faith.” ECF No. 209. 17 The Court dismissed Plaintiffs’ second amended complaint with leave to amend certain 18 claims, ECF No. 195, and subsequently dismissed the case for failure to prosecute after Plaintiffs 19 failed to file a third amended complaint, ECF No. 204. “An appeal may not be taken in forma 20 pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. 21 § 1915(a)(3). It is the judgment of this Court that Plaintiffs’ appeal is frivolous because it “has no 22 arguable basis in fact or law.” O’Loughlin v. Doe,

(9th Cir. 1990) (quotation 23 marks and citation omitted). Appeal of the dismissal is therefore not “taken in good faith” within 24 the meaning of § 1915(a)(3), and Plaintiffs’ in forma pauperis status should not continue for this 25 appeal. See Coppedge v. United States,

, 444–45 (1962). 26 / / / 27 / / / 1 The Clerk shall transmit a copy of this order to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 Dated: August 11, 2023 . ‘ JON S. TIGA 5 nited States District Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 a 12

© 15 16

it

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28