Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 6, 2025

Walker v. Krol

Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Docket
4:15-cv-05819
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Walker v. Krol, Judge Gilliam denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees, revoked Walker’s fee-waiver status, and kept the case closed.

Who this affects

Jeffrey E. Walker’s ability to proceed without paying filing fees on appeal; the case remains closed.

What happened

Walker v. Krol concerns Jeffrey E. Walker’s request to appeal without paying filing fees. The Ninth Circuit referred that request to the district court for consideration.

Before this order, the court had denied Walker’s request to reopen the action four years after it was closed, following supplemental briefing. The court found that his appeal was frivolous.

Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. denied Walker permission to proceed without paying filing fees on appeal and revoked his status allowing him to do so. The case remains closed, and the clerk was ordered to send the order to the Court of Appeals.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Walker v. Krol · No. 4:15-cv-05819
Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Date
Jan. 6, 2025

Background

The Ninth Circuit referred Walker’s request to proceed without paying filing fees on appeal to the district court. The district court noted that, in a September 12, 2024 order issued after supplemental briefing, it had denied Walker’s request to reopen the action four years after its closure.

Ruling

The court found that the appeal was frivolous. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), it denied Walker leave to proceed without paying filing fees on appeal and revoked his existing status allowing him to proceed without paying those fees.

Effect of the Order

The case remains closed. The clerk was directed to transmit a copy of the order to the Court of Appeals, and the order terminated docket entry 70.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.