(PC) Singh v. Pheiffer ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL MANJEET SINGH, 1:22-cv-01446-GSA-PC 12 ORDER FOR CLERK TO RANDOMLY Plaintiff, ASSIGN UNITED STATES DISTRICT 13 JUDGE TO THIS CASE vs. 14 AND PHEIFFER, ET AL., 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, Defendants. RECOMMENDING THAT PLAINTIFF’S 16 MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS BE DENIED 17 (ECF No. 4.) 18 OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE IN 14 DAYS 19 20 21 I. FINDINGS 22 Michael Manjeet Singh (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil 23 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 9, 2022, Plaintiff filed the Complaint 24 commencing this action. (ECF No. 1.) On November 14, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion to 25 proceed in forma pauperis along with a certified copy of his prison trust account, pursuant to 28 26 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF No. 4.) 27 Plaintiff’s trust account statement shows that on November 4, 2022, he had a balance of 28 $15,947.50. (Id.) Under these facts the court finds that Plaintiff can afford the $402.00 filing 1 fee for this action. Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis should be denied, 2 and Plaintiff should be required to pay the statutory filing fee of $400.00 for this action in full. 3 II. ORDER, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CONCLUSION 4 A. Order 5 The Clerk is hereby directed to randomly assign a United States District Judge to this 6 action; and 7 B. Recommendations and Conclusion 8 Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 9 1. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, filed on November 14, 2022, be 10 DENIED; and 11 2. Plaintiff be required to pay the $402.00 filing fee for this action in full. 12 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 13 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 14 (14) days after the date of service of these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file 15 written objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to 16 Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 17 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 18 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 21 Dated: November 17, 2022 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28