THOMAS HEILMAN V. A. DILLEN, No. 15-56852 (9th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED APR 25 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT THOMAS JOHN HEILMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 15-56852 D.C. No. 2:14-cv-06298-JVS-CW MEMORANDUM* A. DILLEN, official capacity; et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 11, 2017** Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Thoman John Heilman, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to pay the filing fee after revoking Heilman’s in forma pauperis status (“IFP”) because he has three strikes under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). We * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1118 & n.6 (9th Cir. 2005). We vacate and remand. The district court revoked Heilman’s IFP status on the basis that Heilman had filed at least three prior actions in federal court which were dismissed for being frivolous or malicious, or for failing to state a claim. However, at the time of its decision, the district court did not have the benefit of El-Shaddai v. Zamora, 833 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2016) and Washington v. Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, 833 F.3d 1048 (9th Cir. 2016). We remand for the district court reconsider Heilman’s IFP status in light of these two intervening opinions. VACATED and REMANDED. 2 15-56852

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.