Sivak v. Friedland

Background

Lacey Sivak, whom the opinion describes as an Idaho state prisoner and frequent litigant, filed the seven listed actions without a lawyer. He asked to proceed without paying the filing fee, a status commonly called proceeding in forma pauperis. The court denied those requests under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), which restricts that status for a prisoner who has had three or more qualifying prior cases or appeals dismissed. The court found that Sivak had three or more prior dismissals, had not alleged a specific immediate danger of serious physical injury when he filed the actions, and did not meet the standard for proceeding without paying the fees.

Proceedings and jurisdiction

The court directed Sivak to pay the full filing fee in each case within 14 days or risk dismissal without prejudice. Sivak did not pay the fees and instead appealed the orders denying him the fee waiver. The court explained that an interlocutory appeal generally transfers authority over the appealed issues to the court of appeals, but a notice seeking permission for such an appeal is not treated as filed until the court of appeals grants permission. Because the Ninth Circuit had not granted permission, the district court concluded that it retained authority over these actions.

Ruling

Because the deadlines to pay the fees had passed, Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin dismissed each of the seven actions without prejudice. The court stated that Sivak may file a motion to reopen any case after paying that case's full filing fee, and that a separate full fee is required for each case he wants to reopen and pursue. The court also denied any pending request to proceed without paying the filing fee on appeal under § 1915(g), for the same reasons it had denied that status in the district court. It stated that the Ninth Circuit would independently review any request to proceed without paying the appeal fee. The Clerk was directed to terminate all other pending motions as moot and close the cases.