Massengale v. Green Jr.

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: April 14, 2025
• Docket: 1:24-cv-00065
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 KEVIN MASSENGALE, No. 1:24-cv-00065-KES-CDB (PC) 9 Plaintiff, Appeal No. 24-7070 10 v. ORDER REGARDING IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS ON APPEAL 11 KENNETH R. GREEN, JR., et al. (Doc. 15) 12 Defendants.

13 14 On November 4, 2024, the Court adopted findings and recommendations to dismiss the 15 complaint without leave to amend. Doc. 12. Following the entry of judgment, plaintiff filed a 16 notice of appeal and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Docs. 14, 15. On December 4, 2024, 17 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals referred the matter back to this Court for the limited purpose 18 of determining whether in forma pauperis status should continue for the appeal or whether the 19 appeal is frivolous or taken in bad faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); Doc. 18. 20 Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(3)(A) provides that a party who was permitted 21 to proceed in forma pauperis in the district court action may continue to proceed in forma 22 pauperis on appeal without further authorization, unless the district court certifies that the appeal 23 is not taken in good faith. Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3)(A). “If at least one issue or claim is found to 24 be non-frivolous, leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal must be granted for the case as a 25 whole.” Hooker v. Am. Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002). The Court did not find 26 that the appeal is frivolous or taken in bad faith and, therefore, pursuant to Federal Rule of 27 Appellate Procedure 24(a)(3)(A), plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status continues on appeal. 28 /// 1 Accordingly, plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (Doc. 15) is denied 2 || as moot. 3 4 | ISSO ORDERED. _ 5 Dated: _ April 11, 2025 4h | | ‘ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28