1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 CHRIS HAWKINS, Case No.: 3:25-cv-1956-WQH-DEB Booking No. 2571058, 10 ORDER Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 PATRICK KINNSER, Duty Sworn Police 13 Officer #7936; NOAH A. SALDANA, 14 Duty Sworn Police Officer #1806; SAN DIEGO POLICE DEPARTMENT; RIVE 15 APARTMENTS; JESUS MARTIN DEL 16 CAMPO; DYLAN McGILL, Duty Sworn Police Officer #1896; FILIBERTO 17 TAPIA, #7821; MITCHELL R. FORD, 18 Duty Sworn Police Officer #5582; SAN DIEGO PROBATION; DISTRICT 19 ATTORNEY OF SAN DIEGO; 20 RICHARD SULLIVAN, Duty Sworn Police Officer #7406; SAN DIEGO 21 COUNTY JAIL; STATE OF 22 CALIFORNIA; COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO; CITY OF SAN DIEGO, 23 Defendants. 24 25 HAYES, Judge: 26 Plaintiff Chris Hawkins, while detained in the San Diego County Jail and proceeding 27 pro se, filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to

. (ECF No. 1.) 28 Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee required by

(a) to commence a 1 civil action; instead, he requests leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28

(a). (ECF No. 2.) 3 I. MOTION TO PROCEED IFP 4 All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a district court of the 5 United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of 6 $405. See

(a).1 The action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to 7 prepay the entire fee only if he is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 8 § 1915(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes,

(9th Cir. 2007); Rodriguez v. 9 Cook,

(9th Cir. 1999). However, a prisoner granted leave to proceed 10 IFP remains obligated to pay the entire fee in “increments” or “installments,” Bruce v. 11 Samuels,

, 83–84 (2016); Williams v. Paramo,

(9th Cir. 12 2015), and regardless of whether his action is ultimately dismissed. See 28 U.S.C. 13 § 1915(b)(1) & (2); Taylor v. Delatoore,

(9th Cir. 2002). 14 Section 1915(a)(2) also requires prisoners seeking leave to proceed IFP to submit a 15 “certified copy of the trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for . . . the 16 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint.” 28 U.S.C. 17 § 1915(a)(2); Andrews v. King,

(9th Cir. 2005). From the certified 18 trust account statement, the Court assesses an initial payment of 20% of (a) the average 19 monthly deposits in the account for the past six months, or (b) the average monthly balance 20 in the account for the past six months, whichever is greater, unless the prisoner has no 21 assets. See

(b)(1);

(b)(4). The institution having custody 22 of the prisoner then collects subsequent payments, assessed at 20% of the preceding 23 month’s income, in any month in which his account exceeds $10, and forwards those 24 payments to the Court until the entire filing fee is paid. See

(b)(2); Bruce, 25 26 1 In addition to the $350 statutory fee, civil litigants must pay an additional administrative fee of $55. See 27

(a) (Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees, District Court Misc. Fee Schedule, § 14 (eff. Dec. 1, 2023). The additional $55 administrative fee does not apply to persons granted leave to proceed 28 1 577 U.S. at 84‒85. 2 Although Plaintiff has filed a motion to proceed IFP, he has not attached a certified 3 copy of his San Diego County Sheriff’s Department inmate trust account statements for 4 the 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of his complaint. See 28 U.S.C. 5 § 1915(a)(2); S.D. Cal. CivLR 3.2. Section 1915(a)(2) requires prisoners “seeking to bring 6 a civil action . . . without prepayment of fees . . . [to] submit a certified copy of the trust 7 fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) . . . for the 6-month period immediately 8 preceding the filing of the complaint.”

(a)(2). Without these certified trust 9 account statements, the Court is unable to assess the appropriate initial filing fee which 10 may be statutorily required to initiate the prosecution of Plaintiff’s case. See 28 U.S.C. 11 § 1915(b)(1). 12 II. CONCLUSION 13 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP 14 (ECF No. 2) is denied. 15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this civil action is dismissed without prejudice to 16 refiling for failure to prepay the $405 civil filing fee required by

(a). 17 Plaintiff may re-open this case within forty-five (45) days from the date this Order is filed 18 by either (a) prepaying the entire $405 civil filing and administrative fee in one lump sum; 19 or (b) filing a renewed Motion to Proceed IFP that includes a certified copy of his San 20 Diego County Jail inmate trust account statements for 6-month period preceding the filing 21 of his complaint pursuant to

(a)(2) and S.D. Cal. CivLR 3.2(b).2 22 23 24 2 Plaintiff is cautioned that if he chooses to re-open the case by either prepaying the full $405 civil filing 25 fee or by submitting a properly supported and renewed motion to proceed IFP, his complaint will be subject to an initial review and may be dismissed sua sponte pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) and/or 28

(e)(2)(B), regardless of whether he pays the full filing fee at once, or is granted IFP status and is obligated to pay the fee in installments. See Lopez v. Smith,

, 1126‒27 (9th Cir. 2000) 27 (en banc) (noting that

(e) “not only permits but requires” the court to sua sponte dismiss an IFP complaint that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants who 28 1 If Plaintiff neither (a) pays the $405 civil filing fee in full nor (b) sufficiently 2 ||completes and files a renewed IFP motion together with a certified copy of his 6-month 3 || trust account statements within 45 days, this case will remain dismissed without prejudice 4 || pursuant to

(a), and without further Order of the Court. 5 6 Dated: October 17, 2025 BME: Me Z. A a 7 Hon. William Q. Hayes 8 United States District Court 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3g || screening required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A of all complaints filed by prisoners “seeking redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity”).