Edward Raker v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, et al.

• Court: District Court, D. Arizona
• Decided: May 1, 2026
• Docket: 2:26-cv-02938
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Edward Raker, No. CV-26-02938-PHX-JAT

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 United States Department of Health and Human Services, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. 16 (Doc. 3). 17 I. Legal Standards 18 A. Ability to Pay 19 “There is no formula set forth by statute, regulation, or case law to determine when 20 someone is poor enough to earn IFP status.” Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1235 21 (9th Cir. 2015). “An affidavit in support of an IFP application is sufficient where it alleges 22 that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still afford the necessities of life.” Id. at 1234 23 (citing Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948)). 24 B. Screening – 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)

25 Congress provided with respect to in forma pauperis cases that a district court “shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines” that 26 the “allegation of poverty is untrue” or that the “action or appeal” is “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to state a claim on which relief may be 27 granted,” or “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). While much of section 1915 outlines 28 how prisoners can file proceedings in forma pauperis, section 1915(e) applies 1 to all in forma pauperis proceedings, not just those filed by prisoners. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 2000) (“section 1915(e) applies to all 2 in forma pauperis complaints”). “It is also clear that section 1915(e) not only permits but requires a district court to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint 3 that fails to state a claim.” Id. Therefore, this court must dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint if it fails to state a claim or if it is frivolous or malicious. 4 5 Kennedy v. Andrews, 2005 WL 3358205, *2 (D. Ariz. 2005). 6 “The standard for determining whether a plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) is the same as the 7 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) standard for failure to state a claim.” Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012); see also 8 Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1121 (9th Cir. 2012) (noting that screening pursuant to § 1915A “incorporates the familiar standard applied in 9 the context of failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)”). 10 11 Hairston v. Juarez, No. 22-CV-01801-BAS-WVG, 2023 WL 2468967, at *2 (S.D. Cal. 12 Mar. 10, 2023). 13 Because Plaintiff has moved to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court will screen the 14 complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) before it is allowed to be served. 15 II. Discussion 16 A. Ability to Pay 17 Here, Plaintiff states that he receives $2,600.00 per month in social security benefits 18 and has $1,970.00 per month in expenses. (Doc. 3). Plaintiff does not specify what 19 expenses (like taxes or Medicare part b) are deducted from his monthly benefit. If Plaintiff 20 actually has $630.00 per month in discretionary funds after expenses, he can afford the 21 filing fee. However, it appears that the application is incomplete. 22 The Court will grant in forma pauperis status, but require Plaintiff to file an amended 23 application to determine if in forma pauperis status should be revoked after consideration 24 of all expenses. In the amended application, Plaintiff must specify how much discretionary 25 income he has monthly after all expenses. If Plaintiff fails to file the amended application, 26 or pay the filing fee, within the deadline set below, the Court will revoke in forma pauperis 27 status and dismiss the complaint in this case without prejudice. 28 1 B. Screening 2 In short summary, Plaintiff brings this lawsuit against Defendants seeking 3 reimbursement of $3,055.21 in medical expenses from Medicare. (Doc. 1). The way to 4 bring such a claim in district court is as follows: “The third sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(h), 5 made applicable to the Medicare Act by 42 U.S.C. § 1395ii, provides that § 405(g), to the 6 exclusion of 28 U.S.C. § 1331, is the sole avenue for judicial review for all ‘claim[s] arising 7 under’ the Medicare Act.” Heckler v. Ringer, 466 U.S. 602, 614–15 (1984). Thus, in this 8 case, Plaintiff brings a claim that is permissible by statute in certain circumstances. 9 One such circumstance is that Plaintiff must have exhausted his administrative 10 remedies prior to filing suit. See https://www.medicare.gov/publications/11525-medicare- 11 appeals.pdf (last visited April 30, 2026) (discussing the five steps to seek review of a 12 decision denying a claim, the fifth of which is filing a case in district court). In his 13 complaint, Plaintiff does not mention whether he sought review at the agency. 14 Nonetheless, for the minimum purposes of screening the complaint, the Court finds 15 Plaintiff has alleged a plausible claim to survive screening. However, this Order is without 16 prejudice to Defendants moving to dismiss for lack of exhaustion or any other reason. See 17 Coleman v. Maldnado, 564 F. App’x 893, 894 (9th Cir. 2014) (a district court may properly 18 grant a motion to dismiss despite a prior screening order finding the complaint stated a 19 claim); Jones v. Sullivan, 19-CV-0025BKSCFH, 2020 WL 5792989, at *5 (N.D.N.Y. Sept. 20 29, 2020) (“A court’s initial screening under § 1915(e) and/or § 1915A does not preclude 21 a later dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).”). 22 III. Conclusion 23 Based on the foregoing, 24 IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 3) is 25 preliminarily granted. 26 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff must file an amended in forma 27 pauperis application, or pay the filing fee, within 14 days of this Order. 28 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff must serve the summons, complaint 1 || and a copy of this Order on Defendant within the time set by Federal Rule of Civil 2|| Procedure 4(m). Plaintiff may either serve the complaint through his own means or file a 3 || motion asking for service by the U.S. Marshals. Any motion for Marshal service must be filed within 14 days of the date of this Order. 5 Dated this Ist day of May, 2026. 6 7 ' = James A. CO ? Senior United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-4-