From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Denham v. Sherman

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Oct 5, 2023
1:19-cv-01176 DAD GSA (PC) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 5, 2023)

Opinion

1:19-cv-01176 DAD GSA (PC)

10-05-2023

PAUL DENHAM, Plaintiff, v. STU SHERMAN, et al. Defendants.


ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO MODIFY INMATE FILING FEE ORDER (ECF No. 38)

GARY S. AUSTIN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff, a former pro se litigantwho proceeded in forma pauperis, has filed a motion to modify the Court's inmate filing fee order (see ECF No. 9) which schedules his payments. ECF No. 38. The motion requests that he be permitted to pay a larger amount per month towards the balance so that he can complete his financial obligations. Id. at 1.

On September 28, 2020, this matter was closed when Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed it pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). ECF No. 36.

The court shall deny Plaintiff's request. 28 U.S.C. § 1915, which governs in forma pauperis proceedings does not provide any authority or mechanism for the court to alter payment of the filing fee after the action has been dismissed for any reason. See generally id.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to modify the Court's filing fee order (ECF No. 38) is DENIED.

Plaintiff is further informed that because this case has been closed, any future filings in it will be disregarded.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Denham v. Sherman

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Oct 5, 2023
1:19-cv-01176 DAD GSA (PC) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 5, 2023)
Case details for

Denham v. Sherman

Case Details

Full title:PAUL DENHAM, Plaintiff, v. STU SHERMAN, et al. Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Oct 5, 2023

Citations

1:19-cv-01176 DAD GSA (PC) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 5, 2023)