1 2 3

4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 9 AARON ANTHONY VRH, No. 1:20-cv-00581-JLT-CDB (HC) 10 Petitioner, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF THE COURT TO REFUND FILING FEE 11 v. (Doc. 65) 12 GENA JONES, et al., 13 Respondents. 14 15 Pending before the Court is Petitioner Aaron Anthony Vrh’s motion, by his attorney George 16 L. Schraer, for refund of the $605.00 filing fee erroneously paid for Petitioner’s appeal. (Doc. 65). 17 In the motion, Petitioner’s attorney represents that he contacted this Court’s Financial Department 18 but was unable to obtain cancellation or refund of his payment. Counsel represents that Petitioner 19 is entitled to a refund as he is proceeding in forma pauperis in this action and, although counsel 20 plans to file a request for a certificate of appealability in the Ninth Circuit, it is unclear whether the 21 Ninth Circuit will grant that request and if said request is not granted, Petitioner will not be 22 permitted to appeal. Id. at 2. 23 The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure provide, in pertinent part: A party who was permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in the 24 district-court action … may proceed on appeal in forma pauperis without further authorization, unless: 25 (A) the district court—before or after the notice of appeal is filed— 26 certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith or finds that the party is not otherwise entitled to proceed in forma pauperis and states 27 in writing its reasons for the certification or filing.

28 Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). 1 Here, although the Court declined to issue a certificate of appealability, it did not find that 2 | the appeal was taken in bad faith or that Petitioner was otherwise not entitled to proceed in forma 3 || pauperis. See (Docs. 2, 59). In such circumstances, Petitioner may proceed to file his notice of 4 | appeal in forma pauperis without the need for a second application to proceed in forma pauperis. 5 | Petitioner must then seek a certificate of appealability from the Ninth Circuit before the appeal may 6 | proceed. See, e.g., Greenhill v. United States, No. CR-F-94-5020,

, at *2 (E.D. 7 | Cal. June 8, 2009) (denying motion for certificate of appealability and granting in forma pauperis 8 | application “to the extent further appellate review may be made available” by the Ninth Circuit); 9 | Denton v. Garcia, No. CIV S-03-1558RRBJFMP,

, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 12, 2008) 10 | (denying request for certificate of appealability and finding in forma pauperis application 11 unnecessary because petitioner was granted in forma pauperis status at start of the proceedings). 12 Conclusion and Order 13 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to refund to counsel Petitioner’s filing 14 | fee in the amount of $605.00. 15 | IT IS SO ORDERED. '6 | Dated: _ December 11, 2025 | hr 17 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28