Rudder v. Washington State Department of Corrections

W.D. Washington

Rudder v. Washington State Department of Corrections

DecidedJuly 12, 2024

Docket3:24-cv-05418

StatusUnknown

This text of Rudder v. Washington State Department of Corrections (Rudder v. Washington State Department of Corrections) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rudder v. Washington State Department of Corrections, (W.D. Wash. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 BRANDY LEE RUDDER, 9 Plaintiff, CASE NO. 3:24-cv-05418-LK-BAT 10 v. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S LETTER MOTION TO WAIVE 11 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT RECOUPMENT OF FILING FEE, OF CORRECTIONS, et al., DKT. 9. 12 Defendant. 13 Plaintiff filed a § 1983 prisoner civil rights complaint, and on June 13, 2024, was granted 14 leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Dkt. 5. On July 11, 2024, 15 Plaintiff filed a letter that states: 16 Please excuse & waive all fees to this case to proceed forward. I 17 am well below the poverty level. I have zero dollars & zero outside help. I have LFO’s already stacking up and deducted and when or 18 if I am able to get a job in this prison I still will barely be able to purchase hygiene. So please again remove/waive this fee and allow 19 me to proceed. 20 Dkt. 9. A federal civil action filed by a prisoner such as Plaintiff may proceed only if Plaintiff 21 pays the filing fee or is granted leave to proceed IFP under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The Court 22 cannot grant Plaintiff’s request to excuse or waive recoupment of the filing fee because a 23 prisoner who is granted leave to proceed IFP remains obligated to pay the entire fee in “increments” or “installments.” See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) & (2); Bruce v. Samuels, 577 U.S. 1 82, 84 (2016); Williams v. Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir. 2015). 2 The Court accordingly ORDERS: 3 1. Plaintiff’s letter motion (Dkt. 9) requesting the Court waive or excuse recoupment 4 of the filing fee is DENIED.

5 2. The clerk shall provide a copy of this order to Plaintiff. 6 DATED this 12th day of July, 2024. 7 A 8 BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA United States Magistrate Judge 9

e 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 BRANDY LEE RUDDER, 9 Plaintiff, CASE NO. 3:24-cv-05418-LK-BAT 10 v. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S LETTER MOTION TO WAIVE 11 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT RECOUPMENT OF FILING FEE, OF CORRECTIONS, et al., DKT. 9. 12 Defendant. 13 Plaintiff filed a § 1983 prisoner civil rights complaint, and on June 13, 2024, was granted 14 leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Dkt. 5. On July 11, 2024, 15 Plaintiff filed a letter that states: 16 Please excuse & waive all fees to this case to proceed forward. I 17 am well below the poverty level. I have zero dollars & zero outside help. I have LFO’s already stacking up and deducted and when or 18 if I am able to get a job in this prison I still will barely be able to purchase hygiene. So please again remove/waive this fee and allow 19 me to proceed. 20 Dkt. 9. A federal civil action filed by a prisoner such as Plaintiff may proceed only if Plaintiff 21 pays the filing fee or is granted leave to proceed IFP under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The Court 22 cannot grant Plaintiff’s request to excuse or waive recoupment of the filing fee because a 23 prisoner who is granted leave to proceed IFP remains obligated to pay the entire fee in “increments” or “installments.” See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) & (2); Bruce v. Samuels, 577 U.S. 1 82, 84 (2016); Williams v. Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir. 2015). 2 The Court accordingly ORDERS: 3 1. Plaintiff’s letter motion (Dkt. 9) requesting the Court waive or excuse recoupment 4 of the filing fee is DENIED.

5 2. The clerk shall provide a copy of this order to Plaintiff. 6 DATED this 12th day of July, 2024. 7 A 8 BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA United States Magistrate Judge 9

e 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Rudder v. Washington State Department of Corrections, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rudder-v-washington-state-department-of-corrections-wawd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack