1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PATRICK BIJAN BALAHAN, Case No.: 26-cv-1046-DMS-JAC CDCR #BZ-0347, 12 ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL Plaintiff, 13 ACTION FOR FAILURE TO PAY vs. FILING FEES REQUIRED BY 14 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) AND/OR FOR JEFF MACOMBER, Secretary of CDCR; 15 FAILURE TO PROPERLY MOVE CCI FONTAINE, Correctional Counselor; TO PROCEED IN FORMA 16 CDCR, Correctional Administration, PAUPERIS PURSUANT
17 TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) Defendants. 18 19 20 Plaintiff Patrick Bijan Balahan, currently incarcerated at R.J. Donovan Correctional 21 Facility (“RJD”) and proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 22 U.S.C. § 1983. See ECF No. 1. Plaintiff is transgender and alleges Defendants violated 23 both the Eighth Amendment and the Americans with Disabilities Act by denying her a 24 single cell. See id. at 3–4. For the reasons discussed, the action is DISMISSED without 25 prejudice. 26 I. Failure to Pay Filing Fee or Request IFP Status 27 All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a district court of the 28 United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of 1 $405. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). The action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to 2 prepay the entire fee only if he is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) 3 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1051 (9th Cir. 4 2007) (“Cervantes”); Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). However, 5 a prisoner who is granted leave to proceed IFP remains obligated to pay the entire fee in 6 “increments” or “installments,” Bruce v. Samuels, 577 U.S. 82, 84 (2016); Williams v. 7 Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir. 2015), and regardless of whether his action is 8 ultimately dismissed. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) & (2); Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d 844, 9 847 (9th Cir. 2002). 10 Section 1915(a)(2) requires all persons seeking to proceed without full prepayment 11 of fees to submit an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets possessed and which 12 demonstrates an inability to pay. See Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 13 2015) (emphasis added). In support of this affidavit, prisoners like Plaintiff must also 14 submit a “certified copy of the trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for 15 . . . the 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint.” 28 U.S.C. 16 § 1915(a)(2); Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1119 (9th Cir. 2005). It is from the certified 17 trust account statement that the Court assesses an initial payment of 20% of (a) the average 18 monthly deposits in the account for the past six months, or (b) the average monthly balance 19 in the account for the past six months, whichever is greater, unless he has no assets. See 20 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4). The institution having custody of the 21 prisoner then collects subsequent payments, assessed at 20% of the preceding month’s 22 income, in any month in which his account exceeds $10, and forwards those payments to 23 the Court until the entire filing fee is paid. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2); Bruce, 577 U.S. at 24 85‒86. 25 Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee required to commence a civil action when she filed 26 her Complaint, nor has she filed a motion to proceed IFP, which includes both the affidavit 27 required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) and the certified copies of her trust fund account 28 statements required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). While RJD has provided a copy of 1 Plaintiff’s trust account statement, see ECF No. 2, this accounting, unless accompanied by 2 a motion and affidavit submitted by Plaintiff herself, is insufficient. “The in forma pauperis 3 statute authorizes courts to allow ‘[1] the commencement, prosecution or defense of any 4 suit, action or proceeding, civil or criminal, or appeal therein, without prepayment of fees 5 and costs or security therefor, by a person who [2] makes affidavit that [s]he is [3] unable 6 to pay such costs or give security therefor.’” Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, Unit II 7 Men’s Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194, 214 (1993) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)). “Such 8 affidavit shall [also] state the nature of the action, . . . and affiant’s belief that [she] is 9 entitled to redress.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). “When a claim of poverty is made under 10 section 1915 ‘it is proper and indeed essential for the supporting affidavits to state the facts 11 as to affiant’s poverty with some particularity, definiteness and certainty.’” United States 12 v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981) (quoting Jefferson v. United States, 277 13 F.2d 723, 725 (9th Cir. 1960)). 14 Therefore, unless Plaintiff either pays the filing fee “upfront,” Bruce, 577 U.S. at 86, 15 or files a properly supported motion to proceed IFP that includes an affidavit that satisfies 16 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), her case cannot proceed. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); Cervantes, 493 17 F.3d at 1051. 18 II. Conclusion 19 Accordingly, the Court: 20 (1) DISMISSES this action without prejudice based on Plaintiff’s failure to pay 21 the $405 civil filing and administrative fee required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), and her failure 22 to properly move to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
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 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PATRICK BIJAN BALAHAN, Case No.: 26-cv-1046-DMS-JAC CDCR #BZ-0347, 12 ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL Plaintiff, 13 ACTION FOR FAILURE TO PAY vs. FILING FEES REQUIRED BY 14 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) AND/OR FOR JEFF MACOMBER, Secretary of CDCR; 15 FAILURE TO PROPERLY MOVE CCI FONTAINE, Correctional Counselor; TO PROCEED IN FORMA 16 CDCR, Correctional Administration, PAUPERIS PURSUANT
17 TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) Defendants. 18 19 20 Plaintiff Patrick Bijan Balahan, currently incarcerated at R.J. Donovan Correctional 21 Facility (“RJD”) and proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 22 U.S.C. § 1983. See ECF No. 1. Plaintiff is transgender and alleges Defendants violated 23 both the Eighth Amendment and the Americans with Disabilities Act by denying her a 24 single cell. See id. at 3–4. For the reasons discussed, the action is DISMISSED without 25 prejudice. 26 I. Failure to Pay Filing Fee or Request IFP Status 27 All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a district court of the 28 United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of 1 $405. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). The action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to 2 prepay the entire fee only if he is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) 3 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1051 (9th Cir. 4 2007) (“Cervantes”); Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). However, 5 a prisoner who is granted leave to proceed IFP remains obligated to pay the entire fee in 6 “increments” or “installments,” Bruce v. Samuels, 577 U.S. 82, 84 (2016); Williams v. 7 Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir. 2015), and regardless of whether his action is 8 ultimately dismissed. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) & (2); Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d 844, 9 847 (9th Cir. 2002). 10 Section 1915(a)(2) requires all persons seeking to proceed without full prepayment 11 of fees to submit an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets possessed and which 12 demonstrates an inability to pay. See Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 13 2015) (emphasis added). In support of this affidavit, prisoners like Plaintiff must also 14 submit a “certified copy of the trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for 15 . . . the 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint.” 28 U.S.C. 16 § 1915(a)(2); Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1119 (9th Cir. 2005). It is from the certified 17 trust account statement that the Court assesses an initial payment of 20% of (a) the average 18 monthly deposits in the account for the past six months, or (b) the average monthly balance 19 in the account for the past six months, whichever is greater, unless he has no assets. See 20 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4). The institution having custody of the 21 prisoner then collects subsequent payments, assessed at 20% of the preceding month’s 22 income, in any month in which his account exceeds $10, and forwards those payments to 23 the Court until the entire filing fee is paid. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2); Bruce, 577 U.S. at 24 85‒86. 25 Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee required to commence a civil action when she filed 26 her Complaint, nor has she filed a motion to proceed IFP, which includes both the affidavit 27 required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) and the certified copies of her trust fund account 28 statements required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). While RJD has provided a copy of 1 Plaintiff’s trust account statement, see ECF No. 2, this accounting, unless accompanied by 2 a motion and affidavit submitted by Plaintiff herself, is insufficient. “The in forma pauperis 3 statute authorizes courts to allow ‘[1] the commencement, prosecution or defense of any 4 suit, action or proceeding, civil or criminal, or appeal therein, without prepayment of fees 5 and costs or security therefor, by a person who [2] makes affidavit that [s]he is [3] unable 6 to pay such costs or give security therefor.’” Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, Unit II 7 Men’s Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194, 214 (1993) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)). “Such 8 affidavit shall [also] state the nature of the action, . . . and affiant’s belief that [she] is 9 entitled to redress.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). “When a claim of poverty is made under 10 section 1915 ‘it is proper and indeed essential for the supporting affidavits to state the facts 11 as to affiant’s poverty with some particularity, definiteness and certainty.’” United States 12 v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981) (quoting Jefferson v. United States, 277 13 F.2d 723, 725 (9th Cir. 1960)). 14 Therefore, unless Plaintiff either pays the filing fee “upfront,” Bruce, 577 U.S. at 86, 15 or files a properly supported motion to proceed IFP that includes an affidavit that satisfies 16 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), her case cannot proceed. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); Cervantes, 493 17 F.3d at 1051. 18 II. Conclusion 19 Accordingly, the Court: 20 (1) DISMISSES this action without prejudice based on Plaintiff’s failure to pay 21 the $405 civil filing and administrative fee required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), and her failure 22 to properly move to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a); 23 (2) GRANTS Plaintiff forty-five (45) days leave from the date of this Order to 24 re-open this case by: (a) prepaying the entire $405 civil filing and administrative fee 25 required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) in full; or (b) completing and filing a Motion and 26 Declaration in Support of Motion to Proceed IFP that complies with 28 U.S.C. 27 § 1915(a)(1), (2) and S.D. Cal. CivLR 3.2.b; and 28 / / / l (3) DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to provide Plaintiff with a Court-approved 2 ||form “Motion and Declaration in Support of Motion to Proceed IFP” for her use and 3 ||convenience. Should Plaintiff neither pay the $405 filing fee in full nor sufficiently 4 ||complete and file the attached IFP motion within 45 days, this civil action will remain 5 || dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), and without further Order of 6 || the Court.' 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: June 4, 2026 □ f p 9 a YM « 10 Hon. Dana M. Sabraw United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Plaintiff is cautioned that if she chooses to re-open the case by either prepaying the full $405 23 civil filing fee, or by submitting a properly supported Motion to Proceed IFP, her Complaint will be subject to an initial review and may be dismissed sua sponte pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) 24 || and/or 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), regardless of whether she pays the full filing fee at once, or is granted IFP status and is obligated to pay the full filing fee in installments. See Lopez v. Smith, 25 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (noting that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) “not only 26 ||permits but requires” the court to sua sponte dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants who are immune); 27 || see also Rhodes v. Robinson, 621 F.3d 1002, 1004 (9th Cir. 2010) (discussing similar screening 28 required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A of all complaints filed by prisoners “seeking redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.”).