1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL LITTLETON, Case No. 2:22-cv-0567-TLN-JDP (P) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 The court closed this action on February 23, 2023, because plaintiff failed to state claim 18 for relief, failed to comply with court orders, and failed to prosecute. ECF No. 19. Now, more 19 than two years later, plaintiff has filed a request to refund his filing fee, ECF No. 22, a new 20 motion to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 23, and a motion to appoint counsel, ECF No. 24.1 21 For the foregoing reasons, each motion is denied, and plaintiff is cautioned that any future 22 documents filed by him in this case will be disregarded and no orders will issue in response. 23 Plaintiff filed an identical motion to refund his filing fee in another closed action in this 24 district. See Littleton v. Montiez, 2:22-cv-1067-TLN-AC. Judge Claire denied that motion. She 25 explained that because plaintiff applied for and was granted to proceed in forma pauperis, he was 26 obligated to pay the $350.00 filing fee. ECF No. 16 at 3. She further explained that 28 U.S.C. 27 1 Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 23, is denied as unnecessary. 28 Plaintiff was granted in forma pauperis status on October 11, 2022. ECF No. 15. 1} § 1915(b)@) 2 requires that prisoners who have multiple civil rights lawsuits in which in forma pauperis status was granted make simultaneous 3 payments of twenty percent of the prisoner’s monthly income for each case he has filed. Bruce v. Samuels,

(2016). 4 That the combined amount may add up to more than twenty percent, and at times, leave a prisoner without funds, does not 5 violate the statute, and in fact is consistent with the purpose of the 6 Prison Litigation Reform Act to deter frivolous lawsuits.

at 88- 89. 7 |

[find no reason to depart from the approach taken by Judge Claire. Plaintiff's motion to 8 || appoint counsel is necessarily denied because this case is closed. 9 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 10 1. Plaintiffs motion to refund the filing fee, ECF No. 22, is denied. 11 2. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 23, is denied as 12 unnecessary. 13 3. Plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel, ECF No. 24, is denied as unnecessary. 14 1s IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _ March 7, 2025 q——— 17 JEREMY D. PETERSON 18 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28