1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT CAVAZOS, Case No. 2:25-cv-1381-JDP (P) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 CADENA, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state inmate proceeding pro se, has requested leave to proceed in forma 18 pauperis and has submitted an affidavit in support of his application, as required by 28 U.S.C. 19 § 1915(a)(1). ECF No. 2. 20 Pursuant to federal statute, a filing fee of $350.00 is required to commence a civil action 21 in federal district court.

(a). This court also requires a $55 administrative fee. 22 An action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to prepay the entire fee only if he is granted 23 leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to

(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes, 24

(9th Cir. 2007). 25 A prisoner seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis must submit a “certified copy of 26 the trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for . . . the 6-month period 27 immediately preceding the filing of the complaint.”

(a)(2); Andrews v. King, 28

(9th Cir. 2005). From the certified trust account statement, the court 1 assesses an initial payment of 20% of (a) the average monthly deposits in the account for the past 2 six months, or (b) the average monthly balance in the account for the past six months, whichever 3 is greater, unless the prisoner has insufficient assets. See

(b)(1) & (4); Bruce v. 4 Samuels,

(2016). Prisoners who proceed in forma pauperis must pay any 5 remaining balance in “increments” or “installments,” regardless of whether their action is 6 ultimately dismissed.

(b)(1) & (2); Bruce,

. 7 Plaintiff’s affidavit indicates that he has $5,900 in his inmate trust account, ECF No. 2 at 8 2, and his CDCR trust account shows a balance of $5,957.20, ECF No. 5 at 1. Plaintiff also 9 attests that he is to receive $14,000 from a settlement in another action. ECF No. 2 at 1. Plaintiff 10 lists three dependents and states that he will withdraw $3,650 for them.1 Id. at 2. While the Ninth 11 Circuit has held that “the filing fee . . . should not take the prisoner’s last dollar,” Olivares v. 12 Marshall,

(9th Cir. 1995), the information provided by plaintiff shows that he 13 has sufficient funds to prepay the full $405 filing fee to commence this action and will have 14 adequate funds left over for any incidental personal or commissary expenses. See, e.g., Thomas v. 15 Okwanoko, No. 1:23-cv-0027-EPG (PC),

, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 27, 2023) 16 (noting the prisoner’s failure to explain the money he received from other sources in the previous 17 twelve months and recommending in forma pauperis be denied because he “received more than 18 enough funds to pay the filing fee prior to filing this case”); Hammler v. Dignity Health, No. 19 1:20-cv-1778-JLT-HBK,

, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 24, 2022) (“A court need not 20 authorize a party to proceed in forma pauperis where that individual had the funds to pay the 21 filing fee, but subsequently chose to spend them elsewhere”). 22 Based on plaintiff’s averments, I find that he has failed to demonstrate that he has 23 insufficient assets to pay the filing fee and costs and provide the necessities of life. See Escobedo 24 v. Applebees,

(9th Cir. 2015) (“An affidavit in support of an IFP application 25 is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still afford the 26

27 1 Plaintiff does not explain when he will withdraw these funds for his dependents, but even if he were to withdraw the listed amount, the court is satisfied that plaintiff has sufficient 28 funds to provide for the necessities of life and pay the filing fee. 1 | necessities of life.”). 2 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk of Court assign a district judge to this 3 | matter. 4 Further, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that: 5 1. Plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2, be denied. 6 2. Plaintiff be given twenty-one days from the date of any order adopting these 7 | findings and recommendations to pay the filing fee of $405. 8 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 9 | assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

(b)(1). Within fourteen days of 10 | service of these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the 11 | court and serve a copy on all parties. Any such document should be captioned “Objections to 12 | Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations,” and any response shall be served and filed 13 | within fourteen days of service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file 14 | objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. See 15 | Turner v. Duncan,

(9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Yist,

(9th Cir. 16 1991). 17 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 ( q Sty — Dated: _ June 5, 2025 ow—— 20 JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22 23 24 25 26 27 28