IGNACIO CHAVEZ V. LOS ANGELES COUNTY, No. 14-55697 (9th Cir. 2015)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 16 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT IGNACIO CERVANTES CHAVEZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 14-55697 D.C. No. 2:13-cv-08987-UA-FFM v. MEMORANDUM* LOS ANGELES COUNTY; et al., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California George H. King, Chief Judge, Presiding Submitted April 7, 2015** Before: FISHER, TALLMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges. Ignacio Cervantes Chavez appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action arising out of the vacatur of his state criminal conviction. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). the district court’s denial of leave to proceed IFP. See O’Loughlin v. Doe, 920 F.2d 614, 616 (9th Cir. 1990). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Chavez’s motion for leave to proceed IFP because Chavez failed to allege any facts showing how the defendants had violated his constitutional rights. See Tripati v. First Nat’l Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1370 (9th Cir. 1987) (“A district court may deny leave to proceed [IFP] at the outset if it appears from the face of the proposed complaint that the action is . . . without merit.”); Gibson v. United States, 781 F.2d 1334, 1338 (9th Cir. 1986) (elements of a claim under 42 U.S.C. §1983). Chavez’s motion for appointment of counsel, filed on November 19, 2014, is denied. AFFIRMED. 2 14-55697

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.