(PC) Miller v. Mule Creek State Prison Medical Facility A ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ELIJAH LEE MILLER, No. 2:22-CV-0088-WBS-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 MULE CREEK STATE PRISON MEDICAL FACILITY A, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 19 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion, ECF No. 2, for leave to 20 proceed in forma pauperis. 21 The Court finds that Plaintiff has not made the showing of indigency required by 22 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Specifically, a review of Plaintiff’s prison trust account statement reflects 23 that, as of January 19, 2022, Plaintiff had $1,186.64 in available funds, which is an amount 24 sufficient to pre-pay the filing fees for this action. 25 / / / 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / / 1 Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends that Plaintiff's motion, ECF 2 | No. 2, for leave.to proceed in forma pauperis be denied and that this action be dismissed without 3 | prejudice to refiling upon pre-payments of the filing fees therefor. 4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 5 | Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within 14 days 6 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections 7 | with the court. Responses to objections shall be filed within 14 days after service of objections. 8 | Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal. See Martinez v. 9 | Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 10 11 | Dated: February 15, 2022 Ssvcqo_ 12 DENNIS M. COTA 13 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28