Filed: Apr. 04, 2017
Latest Update: Apr. 04, 2017
Summary: ORDER RE MOTION (Doc. 21) LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , Chief District Judge . Pro se Defendant-Appellant Adil K. Hiramanek was cited for speeding in Yosemite National Park. See Doc. 1. Hiramanek requested that he be permitted to appear telephonically for all matters, claiming that he is disabled and that his request is one for reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Docs. 4-5. On September 30, 2016, the Magistrate Judge granted his request as to pretrial proce
Summary: ORDER RE MOTION (Doc. 21) LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , Chief District Judge . Pro se Defendant-Appellant Adil K. Hiramanek was cited for speeding in Yosemite National Park. See Doc. 1. Hiramanek requested that he be permitted to appear telephonically for all matters, claiming that he is disabled and that his request is one for reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Docs. 4-5. On September 30, 2016, the Magistrate Judge granted his request as to pretrial procee..
More
ORDER RE MOTION (Doc. 21)
LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, Chief District Judge.
Pro se Defendant-Appellant Adil K. Hiramanek was cited for speeding in Yosemite National Park. See Doc. 1. Hiramanek requested that he be permitted to appear telephonically for all matters, claiming that he is disabled and that his request is one for reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Docs. 4-5. On September 30, 2016, the Magistrate Judge granted his request as to pretrial proceedings, but denied his request to appear at the trial telephonically. Doc. 7. The trial was then set for January 25, 2017. Doc. 10.
On December 14, 2016, Hiramanek filed a notice of appeal of the Magistrate Judge's order denying his request to appear at the trial telephonically. Doc. 11. On March 6, 2017, this Court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Doc. 17.
On March 10, 2017, Hiramanek appealed to the Ninth Circuit this Court's March 6, 2017 order dismissing his appeal from the Magistrate Judge's order. Doc. 17. On March 14, 2017, the Ninth Circuit informed Hiramanek that "[p]ayment of the $505 docketing and filing fees is past due. Failure to correct this deficiency within 14 days will result in the dismissal of this case for failure to prosecute. The fee is payable to the District Court." United States v. Hiramanek, Case No. 17-10111, Doc. 1 (9th Cir. Mar. 14, 2017) (citation omitted).
On March 28, 2017, Hiramanek filed a motion in this Court (addressed to this Court) and sent a copy to the Ninth Circuit. See id., Doc. 2; Doc. 21. In his motion, Hiramanek asserts that the "filing fee is not applicable and the fee demand should be vacated as improvidently issued," and also requests that counsel be appointed to represent him in his appeal. Doc. 21 at 1-2, 8.
The Court construes Hiramanek's request that the Court vacate the filing fee as a request for him to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP"). To proceed IFP, Hiramanek must file a completed "CJA 23 Financial Affidavit." After Hiramanek has done so, the Court will consider whether to grant him IFP status, and then will consider his request for appointment of counsel on appeal.
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Hiramanek to file a completed CJA 23 Financial Affidavit on or before April 21, 2017. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of the CJA 23 form to Hiramanek.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
