(PC) Felix v. State of California

6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SCOTT EMERSON FELIX, 1:24-cv-00014-EPG (PC) 11 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 12 v. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO PROCEED STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND GRANTING IFP APPLICATION 14 Defendants. (ECF Nos. 4, 6) Plaintiff is a civil detainee proceeding pro se in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff commenced this lawsuit by filing a complaint on January 4, 2024. (ECF No. 1).

Plaintiff has neither paid the filing fee nor applied to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) under 28 19 U.S.C. § 1915, and so on January 8, 2024, the Court issued an order for Plaintiff to do either within 30 days. (ECF No. 3). On February 9, 2024, Plaintiff mailed the Court a notice (ECF No. 4), docketed on February 15, 2024, detailing the difficulties he was experiencing obtaining the ledger report required by the IFP application. Plaintiff asked for additional time to pay file his IFP application. (ECF No. 4). On February 16, 2024, Plaintiff filed a completed IFP application with the attached Patient Account Summary. (ECF No. 6).

25 Plaintiff is a civil detainee, and not a prisoner within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. Page v. Torrey, 201 F.3d 1136, 1140 (9th Cir. 2000). Consequently, the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b) do not apply to him; in relevant part, Plaintiff is not required to pay the full amount of a filing fee. Id.; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). In his motions, Plaintiff made a showing of good cause for delay in submitting the application and the showing required by § 1915(a).

Examination of Plaintiff's application reveals that Plaintiff is unable to afford the costs of this action. Accordingly, both his request for extension of time to excuse late filing (ECF No. 4) and his request to proceed IFP (ECF No. 6) will be GRANTED.

5 | IT ISSO ORDERED. ©! Dated: _ February 16, 2024 [SJ ey — 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE