Whited

Whited v. Young

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaNovember 6, 20233:23-cv-01299California2,258 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 Case No.: 3:23-cv-1299-JES-MSB

AARON JAMES WHITED,

ORDER: (1) GRANTING MOTION

Plaintiff, TO PROCEED IN FORMA v. PAUPERIS [ECF No 6.] and

YOUNG, ELIZABTH HACKET,

(2) DISMISSING CIVIL ACTION AS

ADAM LANGKOWSKI, JESUS

FRIVOLOUS PURUSANT TO

MANABAT, U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) AND 1915A(b) Defendants. 18 19 I. INTRODUCTION On July 7, 2023, Plaintiff, Aaron James Whited (“Plaintiff” or “Whited”), an inmate proceeding pro se, filed a civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. ECF No. 1. On August 14, 2023, the Court dismissed the action because Whited had not prepaid the $402 civil filing fee required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) and had not filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). ECF No. 4. In its Order, the Court gave Whited 45 days to either pay the fee or move to proceed IFP.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.