(PS) Benoist v. Veterans Administration ( 2019 )


Menu:
  • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NOEL BENOIST, No. 2:18-CV-01611-MCE-DMC 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 VETERANS ADMINISTRATION, 15 Defendant. 16 17 On September 16, 2019, the Court dismissed this action without further leave to 18 amend. (ECF No. 28.) On October 29, 2019, Plaintiff, who had proceeded without 19 counsel and in forma pauperis in the district court, filed a notice of appeal. (ECF No. 20 31.) Thereafter, on November 8, 2010, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals referred this 21 matter to the district court for the limited purpose of determining whether in forma 22 pauperis status should continue for the appeal, or whether the appeal is frivolous or 23 taken in bad faith. (ECF No. 34.) 24 “An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing 25 that it is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); see also Hooker v. American 26 Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002) (revocation of in forma pauperis status 27 appropriate where district court finds the appeal to be frivolous). The good faith 28 standard under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 is an objective one. Coppedge v. United States, 1 | 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962). A plaintiff satisfies the “good faith” requirement if he or she 2 || seeks review of any issue that is “not frivolous.” Gardner v. Pogue, 558 F.2d 548, 551 3 | (9th Cir. 1977) (quoting Coppedge, 369 U.S. at 445). 4 For the reasons stated in the findings and recommendations (see ECF No. 24), 5 || adopted by the district judge on September 16, 2019 (ECF No. 28), the Court finds that 6 | the instant appeal is frivolous. The Court thus certifies that Plaintiff's appeal is not taken 7 | in good faith, and concludes that Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status should not continue 8 | for purposes of the appeal. 9 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 10 1. Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status is REVOKED. 11 2. The Clerk of Court is directed to serve a copy of this Order on Plaintiff and 12 | on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 | Dated: November 20, 2019 15 LAM fi CK, mL Ae BK yt - ‘6 Mare LUE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Document Info

Docket Number: 2:18-cv-01611

Filed Date: 11/21/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 6/19/2024