(PC) Rodgers-Castillo v. Allen

E.D. California

(PC) Rodgers-Castillo v. Allen

DecidedMarch 17, 2025

Docket1:25-cv-00304

StatusUnknown

This text of (PC) Rodgers-Castillo v. Allen ((PC) Rodgers-Castillo v. Allen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

(PC) Rodgers-Castillo v. Allen, (E.D. Cal. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MILTON RODGERS-CASTILLO, et al. Case No. 1:25-cv-00304-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF MANUEL RODGERS-CASTILLO TO SUBMIT 13 v. APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS OR PAY FILING FEE 14 ALLEN, et al., THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiffs Milton Rodgers-Castillo and Manuel Rodgers-Castillo (“Plaintiffs”) are state 18 prisoners proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 Plaintiffs initiated this joint action on March 12, 2025.1 (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff Milton 20 Rodgers-Castillo submitted a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, which was granted on March 21 13, 2025. (ECF Nos. 2, 8.) Plaintiff Manuel Rodgers-Castillo has not yet submitted an 22 application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 or paid the $405.00 filing 23 fee for this action. 24 In a recent decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Prison Litigation 25 Reform Act requires each prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis in a multi-prisoner lawsuit to 26 pay “the full amount of a filing fee.” Johnson v. High Desert State Prison, 127 F.4th 123, 132 27 (9th Cir. 2025) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1)).

28 1 At this time, the Court expresses no opinion on whether this case may proceed as a joint action. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 Within thirty (30) days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff Manuel Rodgers- 3 Castillo shall submit the attached application to proceed in forma pauperis, completed and signed, 4 or in the alternative, pay the $405.00 filing fee for this action. No requests for extension will be 5 granted without a showing of good cause. Failure to comply with this order will result in 6 dismissal of Plaintiff Manuel Rodgers-Castillo from this action. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8

9 Dated: March 15, 2025 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MILTON RODGERS-CASTILLO, et al. Case No. 1:25-cv-00304-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF MANUEL RODGERS-CASTILLO TO SUBMIT 13 v. APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS OR PAY FILING FEE 14 ALLEN, et al., THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiffs Milton Rodgers-Castillo and Manuel Rodgers-Castillo (“Plaintiffs”) are state 18 prisoners proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 Plaintiffs initiated this joint action on March 12, 2025.1 (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff Milton 20 Rodgers-Castillo submitted a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, which was granted on March 21 13, 2025. (ECF Nos. 2, 8.) Plaintiff Manuel Rodgers-Castillo has not yet submitted an 22 application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 or paid the $405.00 filing 23 fee for this action. 24 In a recent decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Prison Litigation 25 Reform Act requires each prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis in a multi-prisoner lawsuit to 26 pay “the full amount of a filing fee.” Johnson v. High Desert State Prison, 127 F.4th 123, 132 27 (9th Cir. 2025) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1)).

28 1 At this time, the Court expresses no opinion on whether this case may proceed as a joint action. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 Within thirty (30) days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff Manuel Rodgers- 3 Castillo shall submit the attached application to proceed in forma pauperis, completed and signed, 4 or in the alternative, pay the $405.00 filing fee for this action. No requests for extension will be 5 granted without a showing of good cause. Failure to comply with this order will result in 6 dismissal of Plaintiff Manuel Rodgers-Castillo from this action. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8

9 Dated: March 15, 2025 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

(PC) Rodgers-Castillo v. Allen, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pc-rodgers-castillo-v-allen-caed-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack