Andrews v. Saul
This text of Andrews v. Saul (Andrews v. Saul) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
FILED
NOV 18 2019. 3 . CLERK, U8 AINT 4 SOUTHERN Pisa af OF CALIFORNIA BY □□□□□□ |
6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9. || ANDREA ANDREWS, Case No.: 3:19-cv-01873-BEN-MDD 10 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION □□ 11 |] v- PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS | 12 || ANDREW SAUL, Acting Commissioner . 3 of Social Security, .
i4 || - Defendant.| .
15 16 Before this Court is a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”), filed by 17 || Plaintiff Andrea Andrews. (Docket No. 2.) Plaintiff filed a Complaint seeking judicial 18 review of a decision by the Commissioner of Social Security denying her application for 19 || disability benefits. (Docket No. 1.) 0 __ All parties instituting any civil action, suit, or proceeding in a district court of the 1 || United States, except an application for a writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a plaintiff's failure to prepay the entire 73 fee only if he is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Under 28 ||U-S.C. § 1915¢a)(1), :
5 [A]ny court of the United States may authorize the commencement, _ prosecution or defense of any suit, action or proceeding ... without □ 26 prepayment of fees or security therefor, by a person who submits an affidavit 77 that includes a statement of all assets such [person] possesses that the person is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor. . 28 . □
1 _ A party “need not be absolutely destitute to obtain benefits of the in forma 2 pauperis statute.” Jefferson vy. United States, 277 F.3d 723, 725 (9th Cir. 1960). □□□□ 3 || ‘the same even-handed care must be employed to assure that federal funds are not 4 squandered to underwrite, at public expense, either frivolous claims or the remonstrances 5 ||of a suitor who is financially able, in whole or in material part, to pull his own oar.’”” 6 || Anderson v. California, No. 3:10-cv-2216 MMA (AJB), 2010 WL. 5056019, at *1 (S.D. 7 Dec: 6, 2010) (internal citation omitted). Thus, a court may deny IFP status to an 8 |i applicant who can pay the filing fee with acceptable sacrifice to other expenses. Greene 9 Rodriguez, No. 3:07-cv-1888 W (BLM), 2008 WL 816797 (S.D., Cal. Mar. 24, 2008). 10 || Here, Plaintiff claims she is and has remained unemployed for the past twelve 11 |}months. (Doc. No. 2 at 2-3.) Asa result, she has not received any wages or take- 12 ||home pay during that time. Jd. Furthermore, Plaintiff claims not to possess any assets 13 |laside from a bank account containing $250.00. /d. at 24/4. Plaintiff's affidavit reflects | 14 |/she has monthly expenses of approximately $5,740.00. Jd. 46. This includes $2,100 for 15 rent, $990 for automobile payments, $1,000 for credit card bills, $600 for food, $250 for 16 || utilities, and $800 for medications and miscellaneous expenses. Id. 17 The Court has examined the Plaintiff's affidavit and determined that she has not □ 18 || provided sufficient information to establish an entitlement to IFP status. Plaintiff's 19 affidavit does not indicate if she owns community property with her husband. 20 || Considering the aforementioned, the Court is unable to determine if Plaintiff is entitled to 21 status. 22 || Therefore, the Motion to Proceed IFP is DENIED, and the action is DISMISSED 23 |) without prejudice due to Plaintiff’s failure to satisfy the filing requirement. To have this 24 reopened, Plaintiff must, no later than December 6, 2019, pay the filing fee or file 25 ||a new motion to proceed IFP. If Plaintiff decides to file a new motion to proceed IFP, 26 || she should take care to fully and accurately inform the Court of her financial status. If 27 || Petitioner does not pay the filing fee or submit a new motion, this action shall remain 28 closed without further Order of the Court. For Plaintiff's convenience, the Clerk of Cour 2 .
1 || shall attach to this Order a blank in forma pauperis application. . IT IS SO ORDERED. . 3 Dated: November 2”. 2019 : 4 ‘HON: ‘RT. BENITE 5 | _ _Onited States District Judge 6 7H
10 i |}
□□ □□
16 17 19 20 21
92 23 24 || oe 25 oe 06 . .
27 28 □□
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Andrews v. Saul, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/andrews-v-saul-casd-2019.