Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Favor v. Corcoran State Prison

United States District Court, E.D. California

October 23, 2019

BRANDON ALEXANDER FAVOR, Plaintiff,
v.
CORCORAN STATE PRISON, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO PAY FILING FEE BY CREDIT CARD (ECF NO. 11) ORDER FOR CLERK TO FILE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO PAY FILING FEE BY CREDIT CARD UNDER SEAL ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME FOR PLAINTIFF TO PAY FILING FEE TWENTY-ONE (21) DAY DEADLINE

          BARBARA A. MCAULIFFE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Plaintiff Brandon Alexander Favor (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

         On September 25, 2019, the undersigned issued findings and recommendations that Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis be denied pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and that Plaintiff be required to pay the $400.00 filing fee in full to proceed with this action. (ECF No. 7.) Plaintiff filed objections on October 7, 2019. (ECF No. 8.) The District Judge adopted the findings and recommendations in full on October 10, 2019, and ordered Plaintiff to pay the filing fee within twenty-one days. (ECF No. 10.)

         I. Motion to Pay Filing Fee by Credit Card

         Currently before the Court is Plaintiff's “Motion to Secure Application with Payment, ” filed October 21, 2019. (ECF No. 11.) In his motion, it appears Plaintiff is requesting that he be permitted to pay the filing fee by credit card. Plaintiff has included his credit card number, security authorization, and expiration date in the motion. (Id.)

         The Court is unable to accept credit card payments from pro se parties unless the party or a person who can pay on their behalf physically comes to the Clerk's Office with a credit card for payment. Plaintiff is informed that he may pay the $400.00 filing fee through an alternative method, including authorizing a withdrawal from his prison trust account or a money order sent to the Clerk of the Court which specifies Plaintiff's case number. Plaintiff may also allow a third party to submit the filing fee on his behalf, which may also be paid by money order or with a credit card physically presented to the Clerk of the Court, as noted above. As such, Plaintiff's motion to pay the filing fee by credit card is denied. However, in light of Plaintiff's good faith attempt to pay the filing fee for this action, the Court finds it appropriate to extend the deadline for Plaintiff to submit his filing fee by an alternative method.

         II. Sealing Documents

         Federal courts have recognized a strong presumption that judicial records are accessible to the public. Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). In the case of non-dispositive motions, however, the presumption in favor of public access does not apply with equal force. Id. at 1179. Thus, a showing of good cause will suffice to justify sealing a non-dispositive motion. Id. at 1180.

         Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(d), a court “may order that a filing be made under seal without redaction, ” and the Supreme Court has acknowledged that the decision to seal documents is “one best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, a discretion to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case, ” Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 599 (1978). Courts should consider “the interests [of] the parties in light of the public interest and the duty of the courts.” Hagestad v. Tragesser, 49 F.3d 1430, 1434 (9th Cir. 1995) (quoting Nixon, 435 U.S. at 602).

         As Plaintiff's motion is merely a request to pay the filing fee by credit card, it is clearly not a dispositive motion, and therefore requires only a showing of good cause to justify sealing it. See Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179. The Court finds that, because the motion appears to include Plaintiff's actual credit card number, security authorization, and expiration date, good cause exists to permit filing it under seal. As the motion is otherwise merely a request to pay the filing fee by credit card, and is relatively short, the motion in its entirety shall be filed under seal.

         III. Conclusion and Order

         Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. Plaintiff's motion to pay the filing fee by submiting a credit card, (ECF No. 11), is DENIED;
2. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to file Plaintiff's motion to pay the filing fee by credit card, (ECF No. ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.