Hopkins v. Tacoma Municipal Court , 393 F. App'x 476 ( 2010 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 26 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DENNIS R. HOPKINS, No. 08-35130
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. CV-07-05621-RBL
v.
MEMORANDUM *
TACOMA MUNICIPAL COURT; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Ronald B. Leighton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 10, 2010 **
Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Dennis Hopkins appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his
complaint. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of
discretion a denial of leave to proceed in forma pauperis, Calhoun v. Stahl, 254
F.3d 845, 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (per curiam), and a dismissal for failure to follow the
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
district court’s order to pay the filing fee, Yourish v. Cal. Amplifier, 191 F.3d 983,
986 (9th Cir. 1999). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Hopkins’s
application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis because Hopkins did not account
for his different statements regarding his employment history or otherwise verify
his claim of poverty. See United States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir.
1981) (per curiam).
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Hopkins’s
complaint because Hopkins did not comply with the district court’s previous order
to pay the filing fee. See Yourish, 191 F.3d at 986.
AFFIRMED.
2 08-35130