1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 KRISTIN HARDY, No. 2:13-cv-0726 JAM DB P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER 13 C. DAVIS, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner, was previously proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 17 28 U.S.C. §1983. On December 30, 2021, parties filed a stipulation of dismissal and indicated 18 that they had reached a settlement agreement in this case. (ECF No. 159; see ECF No. 160 at 2.) 19 The case was dismissed pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 20 (See ECF No. 161.) 21 Plaintiff has now filed a request for partial refund of fees. (ECF No. 162.) In his request, 22 plaintiff states that upon conclusion of the present action, he received $3,200.00 from defendants 23 via direct deposit as agreed upon in the settlement agreement. (Id. at 1.) Plaintiff claims that 24 following this deposit, prison officials deducted “around 1,006 dollars to pay court filing fees in 25 full.” (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff states that this exceeds the maximum amount set by the court and 28 26 U.S.C. §1915(b)(2). (Id.) Defendants’ counsel filed a declaration opposing plaintiff’s request 27 and included a copy of the plaintiff’s inmate trust account statement. (ECF No. 163.) Plaintiff 28 filed a reply to the defendants’ declaration. (ECF No. 164.) 1 Based on the statements in plaintiff's motion and the information provided by defense 2 | counsel it appears that plaintiff received settlement payment of $3,200.00 on February 24, 2022. 3 | (ECF No. 162 at 1; ECF No. 163 at 12.) Twenty percent of this amount is $640.00. (See ECF 4 | No. 162 at 2.) On March 1, 2022, a total of $1,007.10 was removed from plaintiffs inmate trust 5 | account in connection with outstanding court fees in three cases. (ECF No. 162 at 2; ECF No. 6 163 at 12.) Based on the inmate trust account statement, these amounts individually were 7 | $344.77, $312.37, and $350.00. (ECF No. 163 at 12.) 8 Under 28 U.S.C. §1915(b)(2), a prisoner is required to make payments on court fees equal 9 | to “20 percent of the preceding month’s income credited to the prisoner’s account.” However, 10 | recoupment of filing fees from multiple cases is “simultaneous, not sequential”. Bruce v. 11 | Samuels, 577 U.S. 82, 87 (2016). Additionally, the twenty percent is deducted “for each action” 12 | where court fees are owed. Bruce, 577 U.S. at 90. This means that where a plaintiff owes court 13 || fees in multiple cases, the maximum amount deducted from a each individual case is limited to 14 || twenty percent of the previous month’s income but the total amount deducted for all cases is not 15 || capped in this manner. Id. 16 Here, the three amounts deducted from plaintiffs trust account—$344.77, $312.37, and 17 | $350.00—did not individually exceed twenty percent of plaintiff's preceding month’s income 18 | from the settlement agreement, or $640.00. (See ECF No. 163 at 12.) As such, it appears the 19 | amounts deducted for payment of court fees did not violate 28 U.S.C. §1915(b)(2) or any order of 20 | this court. See Bruce, 577 U.S. at 90. 21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs request for partial return of fees 22 | (ECF No. 162) is denied. 23 | Dated: September 1, 2022

25 %6 .B ORAH BARNES

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

27 28 DB i wOrders/Ps soner/Civil_ Rights/R/hard0726.fees

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28