Williams v. County of Ventura , 443 F. App'x 232 ( 2011 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 15 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CARROLL DEAN WILLIAMS, No. 06-56442
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:06-cv-05310-AHS-CT
v.
MEMORANDUM *
COUNTY OF VENTURA, et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Alicemarie H. Stotler, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 12, 2011 **
Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
Carroll Dean Williams appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying
his application to pursue his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action in forma pauperis. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion,
Calhoun v. Stahl, 254 F.3d 845, 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (per curiam), and we affirm.
*
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).
Because Williams failed to provide sufficient details concerning his income,
assets, and expenditures, the district court did not abuse its discretion by finding
that Williams would be able to pay the filing fee. See United States v. McQuade,
647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981) (per curiam) (an affidavit claiming poverty in
support of a motion made under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 must state the relevant facts
“with some particularity, definiteness, and certainty”).
Williams’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
2 06-56442