Opinion
No. 18-56276
01-23-2019
MAXWELL RANGEL JOELSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. No. 8:18-cv-00777-AG-DFM MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California
Andrew J. Guilford, District Judge, Presiding Before: TROTT, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Joelson's request to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket Entry No. 2) is granted.
The Clerk shall file the opening brief submitted at Docket Entry No. 4.
Maxwell Rangel Joelson appeals pro se from the district court's order denying his application to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") in his action alleging federal claims relating to his federal criminal conviction. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the denial of leave to proceed IFP, and de novo a determination that a complaint lacks arguable substance in law or fact. Tripati v. First Nat'l Bank & Tr., 821 F.2d 1368, 1369 (9th Cir. 1987). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Joelson's motion to proceed IFP because Joelson failed to allege facts in his proposed complaint sufficient to state a claim. See id. at 1370 (district court may deny leave to proceed IFP "at the outset if it appears from the face of the proposed complaint that the action is frivolous or without merit").
AFFIRMED.