Mondragon v. Palafox

── Mondragon v. Palafox ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Date: May 06, 2026 Category: General NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 6 2026 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GIANCARLO MONDRAGON, No. 24-5842 D.C. No. 2:24-cv-06395-KK-DFM Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MEMORANDUM* A. PALAFOX, Lieutenant, individual and official capacity; K. HUFFMAN, A.W., individual and official capacity; H. MOSELEY, A.D., individual and official capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Kenly Kiya Kato, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 22, 2026** Before: LEE, DESAI, and JOHNSTONE, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner Giancarlo Mondragon appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to pay the * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). filing fee or apply for in forma pauperis status. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d 844, 847 (9th Cir. 2002). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Mondragon’s action because Mondragon failed to pay the filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis by the deadline set by the district court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)-(b); Taylor, 281 F.3d at 847 (explaining that under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, “all prisoners who file IFP civil actions must pay the full amount of the filing fee” under the schedule set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)). All pending motions are denied. AFFIRMED. 2 24-5842