Graves v. Visek
Filing
24
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 6/16/11 re 22 Referral Notice REVOKING Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status on appeal. (Meuleman, A)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
PETER GRAVES,
12
13
14
15
16
Case No. 2:11-CV-00367 JAM-GGH
Plaintiff,
v.
RICHARD C. VISEK, et al.,
Defendants.
/
ORDER
Plaintiff’s pro se complaint was summarily dismissed on May 12, 2011, as the allegations
17
contained therein were duplicative of those in another case filed by the Plaintiff in the Eastern
18
District. Judgment was entered accordingly, and Plaintiff timely appealed. See FED. R. APP. P. 4(a).
19
By a referral notice, entered in this Court’s docket on June 13, 2011, the Ninth Circuit
20
“referred [this matter] to the district court for the limited purpose of determining whether in forma
21
pauperis status should continue for this appeal or whether the appeal is frivolous or taken in bad
22
faith.” (Doc. #22) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1915( a)(3); Hooker v. American Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091,
23
1092 (9th Cir. 2002)). Section 1915(a)(3) provides that “[a]n appeal may not be taken in forma
24
pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith,” and Hooker confirms
25
that revocation of in forma pauperis status is appropriate when a district court finds an appeal to be
26
frivolous. See Hooker, 302 F.3d at 1091-92.
27
28
After reviewing the record herein, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s appeal is not taken in good
faith. Plaintiff’s claims are duplicative and were improperly asserted in this action, as detailed in the
1
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com
1
Findings and Recommendations of March 18, 2011 (Doc. # 6).
2
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, pursuant to the Ninth
3
Circuit’s referral notice, Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status is revoked on appeal. See FED. R. APP.
4
P. 24(a)(3)(A).
5
Dated: June 16, 2011
6
/s/ John A. Mendez________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
