(PS) Van den Heuvel v. A.M.P.M. Mini Mart

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JEAN MARC VAN DEN HEUVEL, No. 2:23-cv-00752-TLN-AC Plaintiff, v. ORDER AMPM MINI MART, Defendant.

17 On August 14, 2023, the Ninth Circuit referred the matter to this Court for the limited 18 purpose of determining whether Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis (“IFP”) status should continue on 19 appeal or whether the appeal is frivolous or taken in bad faith. (ECF No. 19 at 1 (citing 28 U.S.C. 20 § 1915(a)(3); Hooker v. American Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002)).) 21 “An appeal may not be taken [IFP] if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken 22 in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). “The test for allowing an appeal [IFP] is easily 23 met . . . [t]he good faith requirement is satisfied if the [appellant] seeks review of any issue that is 24 ‘not frivolous.’” Gardner v. Pogue, 558 F.2d 548, 550–51 (9th Cir. 1977) (quoting Coppedge v. 25 U.S., 369 U.S. 438 445 (1962)); see also Hooker, 302 F.3d at 1092 (noting that an appeal is taken 26 in “good…