John Cephas Young v. Levert

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Case No. CV 20-9199-VBF (KK) Date: January 29, 2021 Title:

Present: The Honorable KENLY KIYA KATO, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

DEB TAYLOR Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorney(s) Present for Plaintiff(s): Attorney(s) Present for Defendant(s): None Present None Present

Proceedings: Order re: Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis [Dkt. 11]

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff John Cephas Young (“Plaintiff”)’s Response to the Court’s January 4, 2021 Order to Show Cause, stating Plaintiff’s bank accounts no longer contain the funds previously set forth in his original IFP Application, and attaching an amended Request to Proceed Without Prepayment of Filing Fees with Declaration in Support (“Amended IFP Application”) constructively filed1 January 9, 2021. Dkt. 11.

Plaintiff’s Amended IFP Application nonetheless remains deficient because Plaintiff has failed to submit a properly completed Certificate of Authorized Officer signed by an authorized officer at Plaintiff’s institution, attaching a certified copy of Plaintiff’s prison trust account statement for the last six (6) months in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). See id. at 9.

Therefore, the Court orders as follows:

Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing by February 26, 2021, why Plaintiff’s Amended IFP Application should not be denied for failure to include a properly completed trust account statement certified by an authorized officer at Plaintiff’s institution. Plaintiff may respond by submitting an IFP Application that corrects this deficiency identified above.

1 Under the “mailbox rule,” when a pro se inmate gives prison authorities a pleading to mail to court, the court deems the pleading constructively “filed” on the date it is signed. Roberts v. Marshall, 627 F.3d 768, 770 n.1 (9th Cir. 2010); Douglas v. Noelle, 567 F.3d 1103, 1107 (9th Cir. 2009) (stating the “mailbox rule applies to § 1983 suits filed by pro se prisoners”). The Clerk of Court has attached an additional blank copy of Form CV-60P to this Order. Plaintiff is encouraged to submit his IFP Application using the provided Form CV-60P, which contains both (1) a blank Prisoner Authorization; and (2) a blank Certificate of Authorized Officer on page 3 of the form.

Plaintiff is expressly warned that his failure to timely comply with this Order may result in denial of his in forma pauperis application and/or dismissal of this action without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.