Howard Williams Jr. v. FBI, et al.

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: October 27, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-01420
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 HOWARD WILLIAMS JR., Case No. 1:25-cv-01420-EPG 10 Plaintiff, 11 ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO v. SUPPLEMENT IN FORMA PAUPERIS 12 APPLICATION FBI, et al., 13 (ECF No. 2). Defendants. 14

15 16 Plaintiff Howard Williams Jr. filed this civil action on October 24, 2025. (ECF No. 1). 17 With the filing of his complaint, Plaintiff submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis 18 (IFP) (ECF No. 2). 19 Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), a pro se plaintiff may proceed without prepayment of fees 20 by submitting “an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets such [person] possesses that the 21 person is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.” See Flores v. California Corr. 22 Women’s Facility, No. 1:19-cv-1509-NONE-JLT, 2020 WL 8821643, at *1 (E.D. Cal. June 24, 23 2020) (noting that § 1915(a)(1) applies to non-prisoner plaintiffs). “[T]here is no formula set forth 24 by statute, regulation, or case law to determine when someone is poor enough to earn IFP status.” 25 Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1235 (9th Cir. 2015). Rather, “[a]n affidavit in support of 26 an IFP application is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still 27 afford the necessities of life.” Id. at 1234. However, “it is proper and indeed essential for the 28 1 | supporting affidavits to state the facts as to affiant’s poverty with some particularity, definiteness 2 | and certainty.” United States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981) (quoting Jefferson v. 3 | United States, 277 F.2d 723, 725 (9th Cir. 1960)). 4 With these standards in mind, the Court notes that Plaintiff's IFP application leaves many 5 | of the required questions unanswered. Plaintiff did not answer Question 1: “Are you currently 6 incarcerated?” (ECF No. 2, p. 1). Nor did he provide an answer to Question 3: “In the past 12 7 twelve months have you received money from any of the following sources?” (/d.). Moreover, 8 Plaintiff checks “No” on the standard form question that asks if Plaintiff is currently employed. 9 (Id.). However, Plaintiff does not fill out the portion of the form asking the date of Plaintiff's last employment and Plaintiff's employer and pay information. 8 Plaintiff's employment status and potential earnings over the last twelve months need to be accurately reported before this Court can determine whether Plaintiff is eligible to proceed IFP 2 in this action. Furthermore, Plaintiff needs to provide complete information in the application to 1S proceed in forma pauperis. M4 Because Plaintiff's IFP application is incomplete, the Court will require Plaintiff to submit 1S a supplemental IFP application. 16 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 17 1. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send Plaintiff, along with this order, a long form 18 IFP application (AO 239). 19 2. Within thirty (30) days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall submit the 20 attached IFP application, completed and signed under penalty of perjury, or in the 21 alternative, pay the $405.00 filing fee for this action. 22 3. No requests for extension will be granted without a showing of good cause. Failure to 23 comply with this order may result in dismissal of this action. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 26 | Dated: _ October 27, 2025 □□□ hey 57 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE