Ortiz v. Ortiz ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE ORTIZ, Case No. 1:19-cv-01416-AWI-SAB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO REMOVE DEBT 13 v. (ECF No. 9) 14 FANNY ORTIZ, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Jose Ortiz (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner, appeared pro se in this civil rights action 18 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed an application to proceed without prepayment of 19 fees which was granted on October 31, 2019. On November 1, 2019, findings and 20 recommendations issued recommending dismissing the complaint without leave to amend for 21 failure to state a claim. On November 14, 2019, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal 22 and this action was closed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a). 23 On October 21, 2020, Plaintiff filed a request that his debt be cancelled and the prison be 24 notified to stop making deductions from his inmate trust account. “Filing fees are part of the 25 costs of litigation,” and prisoner cases are no exception. Slaughter v. Carey, No. 26 CIVS030851MCEDADP, 2007 WL 1865501, at *1 (E.D. Cal. 2007) (quoting Lucien v. DeTella, 27 141 F.3d 773, 775 (7th Cir. 1998)). Filing fees for initiating a lawsuit in district court are authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 1914. Duclairon v. LGBTQ Cmty. & Grace Cmty. Church Klan, No. 1 | 3:18-CV-01095-AC, 2018 WL 5085754, at *1 (D. Or. Oct. 17, 2018) citing Green v. Bank of 2 | America, No. 2:12-cv-02093-GED-CKD PS, 2012 WL 5032414, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2012) 3 | (denying refund of filing fee after pro se plaintiff voluntarily dismissed complaint under Rule 41 4 |(a)). The Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”) has no provision for return of fees that are 5 | partially paid or for cancellation of the remaining fee. Slaughter, 2007 WL 1865501, at | (citing 6 | Goins v. Decaro, 241 F.3d 260, 261-62 (2d Cir. 2001) (inmates who proceeded pro se and in 7 | forma pauperis were not entitled to refund of appellate fees or to cancellation of indebtedness for 8 | unpaid appellate fees after they withdrew their appeals)). 9 Voluntary dismissal does not entitle a litigant to a refund of the filing and docketing fees. 10 | Porter v. Dep’t of Treasury, 51 V.I. 1212, 1216 (3d Cir. 2009). Under the PLRA, once a prisoner 11 | is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the prisoner is obligated to pay the fees in full. 12 | Porter, 51 V.I. at 1218 n.4. The filing fee is assessed for the privilege of initiating the matter, 13 | without regard to the subsequent disposition. Williams v. Roberts, 116 F.3d 1126, 1127 (Sth Cir. 14 | 1997), as revised (July 23, 1997). In fact, “[a] congressional objective in enacting the PLRA was 15 | to ‘mak[e] all prisoners seeking to bring lawsuits or appeals feel the deterrent effect created by 16 | liability for filing fees.” ” Goins, 241 F.3d at 261. Thus, the filing fee is owed upon initiation of 17 | an action, and the obligation to pay the filing fee is not predicated upon the guarantee of some 18 | particular outcome within a particular time frame. Plaintiff filed this action, triggering the 19 | obligation to pay a filing fee, and Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the filing fee cannot be discharged 20 | because it did not proceed as he may have envisioned. 21 Accordingly, Plaintiff's request to remove his debt is HEREBY DENIED. 22 73 IT IS SO ORDERED. OF. nf ee 24 | Dated: _ October 22, 2020_ Of 05 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 26 27 28