UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA DAVID HIRSCH, Civil No. 25-1591 (JRT/SGE) Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER FEDERAL PRISON CAMP and BILL GRANTING PETITIONER’S APPLICATION EISCHEN, Duluth warden or current acting TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON Warden, APPEAL Respondents.

David Hirsch, Reg. No. 08572-029, FPC – Duluth, P.O. Box 1000, Duluth, MN 55814, pro se Petitioner.

Ana H. Voss and Kristen Elise Rau, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, 300 South Fourth Street, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN 55415, for Respondents.

Petitioner David Hirsch is currently serving two consecutive federal sentences: 60 months for possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(B), and 60 months for possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). See United States v. Hirsch, No. 3:20-3019 (N.D. Iowa). After the Court denied Hirsch’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Hirsch v. Federal Prison Camp, No. 25-1591, 2025 WL 2307594 (D.

Minn. Aug. 11, 2025), Hirsch filed a Notice of Appeal to the Eighth Circuit (Docket No. 11).

Hirsch subsequently filed a pro se application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal. (Appl. to Proceed IFP on Appeal, Sept. 26, 2025, Docket No. 14.)

A party seeking to be excused from paying the filing fee for an appeal in a federal case may apply for IFP status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. To qualify for IFP status, the litigant must demonstrate that they cannot afford to pay the full filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).

Even if a litigant is found to be indigent, IFP status will be denied if the Court finds that the litigant’s appeal is not taken in good faith. Id. § 1915(a)(3).

Hirsch has satisfied both requirements to proceed IFP on appeal. First, Hirsch’s application demonstrates that he is incarcerated and presently earns $46.30 per month through his employment while in prison. The Court thus concludes that Hirsch is unable to pay the full filing fee. Second, the Court finds that Hirsch’s appeal, which argues that he is eligible to earn time credits under the First Step Act, is not taken in bad faith. While the Court believes Hirsch’s appeal is unlikely to be successful given the Eighth Circuit’s rejection of arguments nearly identical to Hirsch’s, see Clinkenbeard v. Murdock, No. 24- 3127, 2025 WL 926451 (8th Cir. Mar. 27, 2025) (per curiam), Hirsch has a right to be heard on appeal. The Court will therefore grant Hirsch’s application to proceed IFP.

ORDER Based on the foregoing, and all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on Appeal [Docket No. 14] is GRANTED.

DATED: October 16, 2025 Oty □□ ( eedin at Minneapolis, Minnesota. JOHN R. TUNHEIM United States District Judge -3-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA DAVID HIRSCH, Civil No. 25-1591 (JRT/SGE) Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER FEDERAL PRISON CAMP and BILL GRANTING PETITIONER’S APPLICATION EISCHEN, Duluth warden or current acting TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON Warden, APPEAL Respondents.

David Hirsch, Reg. No. 08572-029, FPC – Duluth, P.O. Box 1000, Duluth, MN 55814, pro se Petitioner.

Ana H. Voss and Kristen Elise Rau, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, 300 South Fourth Street, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN 55415, for Respondents.

Petitioner David Hirsch is currently serving two consecutive federal sentences: 60 months for possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(B), and 60 months for possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). See United States v. Hirsch, No. 3:20-3019 (N.D. Iowa). After the Court denied Hirsch’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Hirsch v. Federal Prison Camp, No. 25-1591, 2025 WL 2307594 (D.

Minn. Aug. 11, 2025), Hirsch filed a Notice of Appeal to the Eighth Circuit (Docket No. 11).

Hirsch subsequently filed a pro se application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal. (Appl. to Proceed IFP on Appeal, Sept. 26, 2025, Docket No. 14.)

A party seeking to be excused from paying the filing fee for an appeal in a federal case may apply for IFP status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. To qualify for IFP status, the litigant must demonstrate that they cannot afford to pay the full filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).

Even if a litigant is found to be indigent, IFP status will be denied if the Court finds that the litigant’s appeal is not taken in good faith. Id. § 1915(a)(3).

Hirsch has satisfied both requirements to proceed IFP on appeal. First, Hirsch’s application demonstrates that he is incarcerated and presently earns $46.30 per month through his employment while in prison. The Court thus concludes that Hirsch is unable to pay the full filing fee. Second, the Court finds that Hirsch’s appeal, which argues that he is eligible to earn time credits under the First Step Act, is not taken in bad faith. While the Court believes Hirsch’s appeal is unlikely to be successful given the Eighth Circuit’s rejection of arguments nearly identical to Hirsch’s, see Clinkenbeard v. Murdock, No. 24- 3127, 2025 WL 926451 (8th Cir. Mar. 27, 2025) (per curiam), Hirsch has a right to be heard on appeal. The Court will therefore grant Hirsch’s application to proceed IFP.

ORDER Based on the foregoing, and all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on Appeal [Docket No. 14] is GRANTED.

DATED: October 16, 2025 Oty □□ ( eedin at Minneapolis, Minnesota. JOHN R. TUNHEIM United States District Judge -3-