(PC)Hill v. Agonone ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 CYMEYON HILL, Case No. 2:22-cv-01845-JDP (PC) 11 Plaintiff, ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF SHOW CAUSE WHY HIS APPLICATION TO PROCEED 12 v. IN FORMA PAUPERIS SHOULD NOT BE DENIED AND HE BE DIRECTED TO PAY 13 J. AGONONE, et al., THE ENTIRE FILING FEE 14 Defendants. ECF No. 2 15 16 17 18 19 20 Plaintiff, a state prisoner, brings this section 1983 action and concurrently has applied to 21 proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2. I have reviewed his prison trust fund account statement, 22 and it appears that he has sufficient funds to cover the filing fee. His account statement indicates 23 that he has an available balance of $4,656, an amount sufficient to cover the $402 filing fee. But 24 before recommending that plaintiff’s application be denied, I will give him an opportunity to 25 respond to this order and to explain why he cannot both pay the filing fee and still afford his 26 necessities. See Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015) (“An affidavit in 27 support of an IFP application is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court 28 costs and still afford the necessities of life.”). 1 Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 2 Within twenty-one days of this order’s entry plaintiff may respond to this order and 3 | explain why he should still be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis. If he fails to do so, I will 4 | recommend that plaintiff's application be denied and he be directed to pay the full filing fee. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _ November 1, 2022 Q_——. 8 JEREMY D. PETERSON 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28