(PC) Dalke v. Sacramento Corrections

Opinion

JOSHUA DALKE, No. 2:22-cv-1842 AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SACRAMENTO CORRECTIONS, et al., Defendants. Plaintiff, a state prisoner, is proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has filed an in forma pauperis application in which he states that he has $0 in cash and no assets. ECF No. 2 at 2. However, his inmate trust account statement reflects that he has a balance of $1,868.08. ECF No. 6 at 1. The court may authorize the commencement of an action “without prepayment of fees or security therefor” by an individual who submits an application evidencing an inability to pay such fees or give security therefor. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Plaintiff has made an inadequate showing of indigency in the application before the court. It will therefore be recommended that the application to proceed in forma pauperis be denied and that plaintiff be required to pay the $402.00 before this action can proceed. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that: 1. Plaintiffs motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2, be DENIED. 2. Plaintiff be given thirty days to pay the filing fee or face dismissal of the case. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). DATED: October 27, 2022 ~ Attar —Chore ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE