1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 MICHAEL J. WINFIELD, Case No. 1:25-cv-01662-EPG (PC) 10 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 11 ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE v. 12 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF RECOMMENDING THAT PLAINTIFF’S 13 CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA 14 PAUPERIS BE DENIED Defendant. 15 (ECF Nos. 2)

16 OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS 17

18 Plaintiff Michael J. Winfield is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action filed pursuant 19 to

. (ECF No.1) On November26, 2025, Plaintiff filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) (ECF No. 2). Plaintiff filed his Inmate Statement Report on December 1, 20 2025. (ECF No. 6). 21 Because Plaintiff can afford to pay the filing fee for this action and still afford the 22 necessities of life, the Court recommends Plaintiff’s IFP application be denied. 23 I. BACKGROUND 24 On November 26, 2025, along with his Complaint, Plaintiff filed an application to proceed 25 IFP. (ECF No. 2). The application requires Plaintiff to answer questions under penalty of perjury. 26 Once question asks, “do you have a checking or savings account?” (Id., p .2) Plaintiff claimed 27 that he has such an account and has $1,000 in that account. (Id.). Plaintiff also indicated that he 28 1 had not received any money in the past 12 months from any source, and had no other assets. (Id.) 2 Moreover, Plaintiff filed his Inmate Statement Report on December 1, 2025. (ECF No. 6). 3 According to that statement, Plaintiff’s inmate account balance as of December 1, 2025 was 4 $3,383.38. (ECF No. 6, at p. 2). The report also lists a previous account balance of $25,893.22 on June 1, 2025 (Id.). Between June 1, 2025, and July 1, 2025, Plaintiff’s inmate account had 5 various withdrawals, including a withdrawal of $20,000 on July 1, 2025. 6 II. LEGAL STANDARDS 7 Under

(a)(1), a pro se plaintiff may proceed without prepayment of fees 8 by submitting “an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets such [person] possesses that the 9 person is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.” See Flores v. California Corr. 10 Women’s Facility, No. 1:19-cv-1509-NONE-JLT,

, at *1 (E.D. Cal. June 24, 11 2020) (noting that § 1915(a)(1) applies to non-prisoner plaintiffs). “An affidavit in support of an 12 IFP application is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still 13 afford the necessities of life.” Escobedo v. Applebees,

(9th Cir. 2015). 14 In addition to filing an affidavit, a prisoner “shall submit a certified copy of the trust fund 15 account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the prisoner for the 6-month period 16 immediately preceding the filing of the complaint or notice of appeal, obtained from the 17 appropriate official of each prison at which the prisoner is or was confined.” § 1915(a)(2). 18 Lastly, under § 1915(e)(2)(A), a “court shall dismiss” a case if it determines that “the 19 allegation of poverty is untrue.” 20 III. ANALYSIS 21 The Court recommends that Plaintiff’s IFP application be denied because information 22 disclosed on the application, when taken in connection with Plaintiff’s Prisoner inmate account 23 statement, indicates that Plaintiff’s allegation of poverty is untrue, and Plaintiff can afford to pay 24 the $405 fee required to file this action. 25 As of December 1, 2025, Plaintiff’s balance in his inmate account was $3,383.38, which is 26 more than sufficient to pay the filing fee and still afford the necessities of life. Moreover, 27 Plaintiff’s inmate account had a balance of $25,892.22 on June 1, 2025, and several withdrawals since that time. (See ECF No. 6). 28 1 Because Plaintiff’s disclosures reveal that he can pay the $405 filing fee and still afford 2 | the necessities of life, the Court will recommend that his IFP application be denied. 3 IV. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to assign a 5 | District Judge to this case. 6 And for the reasons given above, IT IS RECOMMENDED as follows: 7 1. Plaintiff's IFP application (ECF No. 2) be DENIED. 8 2. Plaintiff be ordered to pay the $405 filing fee for this action.

9 3. Plaintiff be advised that failure to timely pay the filing fee will result in the dismissal of this action. 10 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title

(b)(1). Within thirty (30) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any objections shall be limited to no more than fifteen (15) pages, including exhibits. Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified ° time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler,

(9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan,

(9th Cir. 1991)).

19 | Tr IS SO ORDERED. 20 Dated: _ December 1, 2025 [sl ee ey UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28