Jimmy W. Brown v. Janan Cavagnolo

E.D. California

Jimmy W. Brown v. Janan Cavagnolo

DecidedNovember 26, 2025

Docket2:25-cv-02918

StatusUnknown

This text of Jimmy W. Brown v. Janan Cavagnolo (Jimmy W. Brown v. Janan Cavagnolo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jimmy W. Brown v. Janan Cavagnolo, (E.D. Cal. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JIMMY W. BROWN, Case No. 2:25-cv-2918-TLN-JDP (P) 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 JANAN CAVAGNOLO, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state inmate, brings this 28 U.S.C. § 2254 action and concurrently has applied 18 to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 6. I have reviewed his trust fund account statement, and it 19 appears that he has sufficient funds to cover the filing fee. His account statement indicates that he 20 has an available balance of $7,663.98—more than enough to cover the $5 filing fee. Id. Before 21 recommending that petitioner’s application be denied, I will give him an opportunity to respond 22 to this order and to explain why he cannot both pay the filing fee and still afford his necessities. 23 See Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015) (“An affidavit in support of an 24 IFP application is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still 25 afford the necessities of life.”). 26 Accordingly, it is ORDERED that within twenty-one days of this order’s entry petitioner 27 may respond to this order and explain why he should still be allowed to proceed in forma 28 pauperis. If he fails to do so, I will recommend that petitioner’s application be denied, and he be 1 | directed to pay the full filing fee. 2 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 ( | { Dated: _ November 26, 2025 Q_——_. 5 JEREMY D. PETERSON 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JIMMY W. BROWN, Case No. 2:25-cv-2918-TLN-JDP (P) 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 JANAN CAVAGNOLO, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state inmate, brings this 28 U.S.C. § 2254 action and concurrently has applied 18 to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 6. I have reviewed his trust fund account statement, and it 19 appears that he has sufficient funds to cover the filing fee. His account statement indicates that he 20 has an available balance of $7,663.98—more than enough to cover the $5 filing fee. Id. Before 21 recommending that petitioner’s application be denied, I will give him an opportunity to respond 22 to this order and to explain why he cannot both pay the filing fee and still afford his necessities. 23 See Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015) (“An affidavit in support of an 24 IFP application is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still 25 afford the necessities of life.”). 26 Accordingly, it is ORDERED that within twenty-one days of this order’s entry petitioner 27 may respond to this order and explain why he should still be allowed to proceed in forma 28 pauperis. If he fails to do so, I will recommend that petitioner’s application be denied, and he be 1 | directed to pay the full filing fee. 2 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 ( | { Dated: _ November 26, 2025 Q_——_. 5 JEREMY D. PETERSON 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Jimmy W. Brown v. Janan Cavagnolo, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jimmy-w-brown-v-janan-cavagnolo-caed-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack