1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WESTERN DIVISION 11 RICHARD W. GAYTON ) Case No. 2:20-cv-06758-VAP (JDE) ) 12 Plaintiffs, ) ) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY 13 v. ) THE ACTION SHOULD NOT BE ) 14 RENZO FIDANI II, MERI ) DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO ) PAY FULL FILING FEE 15 ASERIO, GAIL COHEN, PAULA )

S. TESKE, DCFS, LAPD, AND )

16 DOE’S 1-10, ) ) 17 Defendants. ) ) 18 19 I. 20 INTRODUCTION 21 On July 28, 2020, Plaintiff Richard W. Gayton (“Plaintiff”) paid a $5 22 filing fee and submitted for filing a document bearing the above caption, with 23 the following title: 24 1. ORDER SHOW CAUSE: WRIT HABEAS CORPUS OF MINOR

UNDER § 2252, CPC § 1473,

25 2. MOTION REQUEST HOLD DEFENDANT IN CONTEMPT§ 26 3. JUDICIAL NOTICE OF TORT COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION

OF 4TH, 14TH AMENDMENTS AND §§§ 1983, 1985, 1988

27 4. PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF OF CUSTODY OF 28 MINOR 1 5. PREVENTIVE INJUNCTIVE RELIEF TRO 6. MOTION REQUEST ON TENTATIVE RULING 2 7. MOTION TO VOID CASE #CK946573, BF054763 3 8. MOTION FOR FUTURE ATTORNEYS FEES 4 Dkt. 1 (“Complaint”) at 1 (CM/ECF pagination). Directly below the caption 5 is written “Writ of Habeas Corpus.” Id. Plaintiff requests “a preliminary 6 injunction relief to return minor H.G. with 48 hours and under Federal Rule of 7 Civil Procedure § 65 a restraining order against defendants to protect minor 8 and assure minor child safety.” Id. at 2. Plaintiff asserts “Defendant, Mr. 9 Fidani, has detained the Minor Child for over eighteen months” after the child 10 was removed “from the Mother” by “an extralegal seizure . . . in violation of 11 the express provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure.” Id. at 4. Plaintiff avers 12 he seeks “Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to redress the 13 deprivation by defendants and Does 1-30 at all times acting under color of state 14 law, of rights secured to Plaintiffs under the United States Constitution, 15 including the 1st, 4th, and 14th Amendments” and claims “habeas jurisdiction 16 is proper in a suit brought to challenge the legality of the custody of a class of 17 children.” Id. at 6. Plaintiff identifies Defendant Fidani, who has custody of 18 H.G., as H.G.’s father. Id. at 5. Plaintiff identifies “Jasmine” as H.G.’s 19 mother. Id. at 6. The Complaint does not appear to specify Plaintiff’s 20 relationship to H.G., but an attachment states Plaintiff, as of July 16, 2020, 21 “plan[s] to begin adoption procedures.” See Dkt. 1 at 43. It also appears from 22 attachments to the Complaint that a California state juvenile court has issued 23 Orders and a Judgment regarding custody of H.G. See Dkt. 1 at 55, 67, 72-74. 24 II. 25 FILING FEES 26 All parties instituting any civil action in a district court, except an 27 application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a total filing fee of $400 28 representing a $350 statutory filing fee and a mandatory $50 administrative fee. 1 See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees, District Court 2 Misc. Fee Schedule, § 14, issued pursuant to authority granted by 28 U.S.C. § 3 1914(b)). The fee to file an application for a writ of habeas corpus is $5. See 28 4 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to prepay 5 the entire filing fee only if such plaintiff is granted leave to proceed IFP under 6 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 7 Here, Plaintiff paid a $5 filing fee to institute the action. Although the 8 Complaint contains references to a request for a writ of habeas corpus on 9 behalf of H.G., the Complaint refers to Plaintiff as “Plaintiff,” cites as its basis 10 for jurisdiction as 42 U.S.C. § 1983, entitled “Civil action for deprivation of 11 rights,” which a federal civil cause of action for civil rights violations 12 committed under color of state law. Further, to the extent Plaintiff seeks to 13 base his action on the 28 U.S.C. § 2254, authorizing the filing of a petition for 14 writ of habeas corpus by a person in state custody, “section 2254 does not 15 confer federal habeas jurisdiction over challenges to state child custody 16 proceedings.” Wiles on behalf of J.D.Z. v. Arizona Dept. of Child Custody, 17 790 F. App’x 85 (9th Cir. Jan. 13, 2020) (citing Lehman v. Lycoming Cty. 18 Children’s Servs. Agency, 458 U.S. 502, 515-16 (1982)). 19 In addition, Plaintiff, who does not allege he is a parent or legal guardian 20 of H.G., brings this action in his own name only. Even were Plaintiff a parent 21 or legal guardian, to the extent Plaintiff seeks to pursue an action on H.G.’s 22 behalf, an action brought by a minor child may only proceed if the child is 23 represented by (1) a guardian and (2) an attorney. See Castillo-Ramirez v. 24 Cnty. Of Sonoma, No. C-09-5938 EMC, 2010 WL 1460142, at *1 (N.D. Cal. 25 Apr. 9, 2010). “[A] parent or guardian cannot bring an action on behalf of a 26 minor child without retaining a lawyer.” Johns v. Cnty. of San Diego, 114 27 F.3d 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1997), Further, under Rule 83-2.2.1 of the Local Rules 28 of this Court, “[a] non-attorney guardian for a minor or incompetent person 1 must be represented by counsel.” Thus, although a non-attorney parent may 2 appear pro se on his or her own behalf, he or she “has no authority to appear 3 as an attorney for others.” C.E. Pope Equity Trust v. United States, 818 F.2d 4 696, 697 (9th Cir. 1987). 5 For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff appears unable to pursue this action 6 as habeas action in his own name purportedly on behalf of H.G. As Plaintiff 7 cites Section 1983 as a basis for his claims, and references other purported civil 8 claims in the Complaint, it appears that Plaintiff does seek to pursue civil 9 claims in his own name. The Court makes no determination about the viability 10 of any such civil claims by this order. But, as a habeas petition does not appear 11 procedurally proper, Plaintiff must pay the otherwise applicable $400 filing fee, 12 with a credit for the $5 fee already paid, to continue to pursue this action as a 13 civil action. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). 14 III. 15 ORDER 16 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff shall, within 21 days from 17 the date of this Order, either: 18 (1) pay $395 to the Clerk of the Court representing the remainder of the 19 applicable filing fee due to pursue a civil action in this Court; 20 OR 21 (2) submit a completed, executed request to proceed in forma pauperis 22 using the Court’s approved in forma pauperis application form; 23 OR 24 (3) show cause, in writing, why the case should not be dismissed for 25 failure to pay the proper filing fee. 26 Alternatively, Plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss the action. The Clerk is 27 directed to serve upon Plaintiff with this order a copy of the Court’s form in 28 forma pauperis application and form notice of request for dismissal. 1 Plaintiff is cautioned that a failure to timely comply with this order may 2 result in the dismissal of this action without further notice for failure to pay the 3 || applicable filing fee, failure to comply with a court order, and failure to 4 || prosecute. 5 6 || Dated: August 3, 2020

8 9 ND. EARLY nited States Magistrate Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28