Boyd v. International Union of Operating Engineers Local 701

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: July 1, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-01225
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 BRITTNEY C. BOYD, 9 Plaintiff, Case No. C25-1225-LK 10 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 11 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 701, 12 et al., 13 Defendants. 14

15 Plaintiff has filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) in the 16 above-entitled action. (Dkt. # 1.) In the application, Plaintiff states that that she is unemployed, 17 received $60,000 from pensions, annuities, or life insurance payments in the past year, has $40 in 18 cash, no bank accounts, owns no valuable property, and has two dependents that she contributes 19 nothing toward supporting. (Id. at 1-2.) She reports her monthly expenses are $500, covering her 20 cell phone and transportation, and explains she is currently homeless due to losing her residence 21 in a house fire on January 20, 2024. (Id. at 2.) She also notes she is receiving $506/month from 22 temporary assistance for needy families, and $753/month in food assistance. (Id.) 23 1 The district court may permit indigent litigants to proceed IFP upon completion of a 2 proper affidavit of indigence. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). “To qualify for in forma pauperis status, 3 a civil litigant must demonstrate both that the litigant is unable to pay court fees and that the 4 claims he or she seeks to pursue are not frivolous.” Ogunsalu v. Nair, 117 F. App’x 522, 523

5 (9th Cir. 2004), cert. denied, 544 U.S. 1051 (2005). To meet the first prong of this test, a litigant 6 must show that he or she “cannot because of his [or her] poverty pay or give security for the 7 costs and still be able to provide him[ or her]self and dependents with the necessities of life.” 8 Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948) (internal alterations 9 omitted). 10 Here, Plaintiff’s application contains a contradiction. She reports receiving $60,000 over 11 the past year, yet states her current monthly expenses are only $500, covered by temporary 12 assistance. This large unaccounted for sum suggests she might have the resources or accumulated 13 savings to cover basic needs, which conflicts with her claimed inability to pay. Without further 14 details on how she has used the funds or why she cannot pay court fees despite the money

15 received, the Court cannot determine whether she lacks the financial means to pay court fees and 16 costs. Given these circumstances, Plaintiff should not be authorized to proceed IFP. 17 Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED to show cause by July 15, 2025, why this Court 18 should not recommend that her IFP application be denied.1 In the alternative, Plaintiff may file 19 an amended IFP application clarifying the matters noted above by that date. The Clerk is directed 20 to re-note Plaintiff’s IFP application (dkt. # 1) for July 15, 2025 and to send copies of this Order 21 to Plaintiff, along with a blank IFP application, and to the Honorable Lauren J. King. 22 1 To the extent Plaintiff fears public disclosure of her private information, the Court directs Plaintiff to 23 Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 5(g), which outlines the circumstances and procedures for filing documents under seal (available at https://www.wawd.uscourts.gov/local-rules-and-orders (last accessed July 1, 2025)). 1 Dated this 1st day of July, 2025. 2 A 3 MICHELLE L. PETERSON United States Magistrate Judge 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23