Heredia v. CCI

Heredia · United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · March 31, 2025 · No. 1:16-cv-00788-KES-CDB

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California denied Aaron Augustine Heredia’s request to remove his obligation to pay the filing fee under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. The court explained that proceeding in forma pauperis permits payment over time but does not waive the filing fee, and that Heredia remained responsible for the unpaid balance. As of February 19, 2025, $43.14 had been collected, leaving a balance of $306.86.

Holdings

  1. Granting in forma pauperis status permits a prisoner to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee; it does not waive the fee. Once the action is brought, the prisoner remains obligated to pay the full filing fee through deductions from the prison account, even after dismissal or closure of the case.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a prisoner who was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis may have the remaining PLRA filing-fee obligation cancelled after the action has been filed and closed.
  2. Whether indigency or dismissal of the action eliminates the prisoner's obligation to pay the full filing fee over time.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (5)

  • Ramirez v. Perez, No. 1:22-cv-00564-JLT-SAB (PC), 2022 WL 2118964, at *1 (E.D. Cal. June 13, 2022)(followed)
  • Duclairon v. LGBTQ Cmty. & Grace Cmty. Church Klan, No. 3:18-CV-01095-AC, 2018 WL 5085754, at *1 (D. Or. Oct. 17, 2018)(cited)
  • Green v. Bank of America, No. 2:12-cv-02093-GED-CKD PS, 2012 WL 5032414, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2012)(cited)
  • Slaughter v. Carey, No. CIVS03085 1IMCEDADP, 2007 WL 1865501, at *1 (E.D. Cal. June 28, 2007)(cited)
  • Rodriguez v. Diaz, No. 1:19-cv-01118-AWI-JDP, 2020 WL 1433005, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2020)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…