(PC) Lanier v. Doerer

Opinion

KAREEM LANIER, No. 1:24-cv-01178 GSA Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION ORDERING “DEFENDANT VEGA” TO v. RESPOND J. DOERER, (ECF No. 10) Defendant. Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. Plaintiff has yet to complete his in forma pauperis application by filing a prison trust fund account statement. See generally ECF No. 9 (1/29/25 order granting Plaintiff extension of time to file trust statement). Plaintiff has filed a motion requesting the Court to order “Defendant Vega” to produce his six-month prison trust fund account statement. ECF No. 10. In support of the motion, Plaintiff states that he has requested the statement from one V. Vega, a case manager, on several occasions. However, to date he has not received a response from her. Id. Plaintiff’s request will be denied because V. Vega, a case manager, is not a Defendant in this case and the complaint has not been screened and served. Therefore, this Court has no jurisdiction to direct her to provide Plaintiff with his six-month trust account statement. See U.S. Const. art. III, § 2 (case or controversy requirement); see also Alvarez v. Smith, 558 U.S. 87, 92 (2009). Furthermore, in forma pauperis status is not a constitutional right. Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1180 (9th Cir. 1999). Despite this fact, the filing fee must be paid. See 28 U.S.C. 1914. Accordingly, Plaintiff is reminded that he also has the option of paying the filing fee in full upfront. As importantly, Plaintiff was recently granted an extension of time to file his trust account statement. He has until the end of that period to do so. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to order “Defendant Vega” to respond (ECF No. 10) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 30, 2025 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE