UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 15, 2011
ANTHONY ENENMOH, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER REVOKING PLAINTIFF'S IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS ON APPEAL
Plaintiff Steve Wilhelm ("Plaintiff") is a prisoner in the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Plaintiff was proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action. Plaintiff initiated this action by filing his complaint on September 14, 2010. On May 6, 2011, the Court dismissed this action for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff subsequently filed a notice of appeal on May 25, 2011. Doc. 9.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), "[a]n appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith." The Court finds that Plaintiff's appeal is not taken in good faith. Plaintiff's allegations failed to state a claim. Plaintiff alleged at most a difference of medical opinion between an inmate and a medical professional, which is not a cognizable Eighth Amendment claim. Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1057 (9th Cir. 2004). Plaintiff's allegations against Defendants who participated solely in the inmate grievance process fails to state a claim, as there is no liberty interest in a specific inmate grievance procedure. Ramirez v. Galaza, 334. F3.d 850, 860 (9th Cir. 2003). Plaintiff also failed to make specific allegations regarding one Defendant, which fails to state a claim.
Long v. County of Los Angeles, 442 F.3d 1178, 1185 (9th Cir. 2006).
Accordingly, Plaintiff's appeal is not taken in good faith, and is frivolous. Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status is HEREBY ORDERED revoked for purposes of his appeal.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.