Karan Tandon v. Coinbase, Inc., et al.

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: September 29, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-02111
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KARAN TANDON, Case No. 2:25-cv-02111-DJC-CSK PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DENYING MOTION TO PROCEED IN 14 COINBASE, INC., et al., FORMA PAUPERIS 15 Defendants. (ECF No. 2) 16 17 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Karan Tandon’s motion to proceed in forma 18 pauperis.1 (ECF No. 2.) Plaintiff proceeds without counsel in this action. Plaintiff has 19 initiated this action with a civil complaint and an application to proceed in forma pauperis. 20 (ECF No. 1, 2.) For the reasons that follow, the Court recommends DENYING Plaintiff’s 21 motion to proceed in forma pauperis. 22 I. LEGAL STANDARDS 23 In order to commence a civil action, along with the complaint, a plaintiff must 24 either pay the $350.00 filing fee and the $55.00 administrative fee or file an application 25 requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a), 1915(a). The 26 court may authorize the commencement of an action “without prepayment of fees” by an 27 1 This matter proceeds before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, Fed. R. 28 Civ. P. 72, and Local Rule 302(c). 1 individual who submits an affidavit evidencing an inability to pay such fees. 28 U.S.C. 2 § 1915(a). “An affidavit in support of an [in forma pauperis] application is sufficient where 3 it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still afford the necessities of life.” 4 Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015) (citing Adkins v. E.I. Du 5 Pont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948)); see also United States v. McQuade, 6 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981) (affidavit must “state the facts as to affiant’s poverty 7 with some particularity, definiteness and certainty” (internal quotation omitted)). 8 II. DISCUSSION 9 Plaintiff’s affidavit in support of his motion does not demonstrate Plaintiff’s inability 10 to pay the court costs and still afford the necessities of life when Plaintiff filed this suit. 11 According to the affidavit, Plaintiff receives $1,000 per week in take-home pay or wages. 12 Pl. Mot. at 1 (ECF No. 2). Plaintiff also states that he has a 40% ownership stake in a 13 business that earns revenue of about $19,052 per month, and a rental property 14 (purchased via a mortgage) that provides $3,800 per month in rent. Id. at 1. Plaintiff 15 states he has between $175,000 and $200,000 in cash or in a bank account. Id.at 2. In 16 terms of expenses, Plaintiff states that he has about $10,000 per month in expenses and 17 he supports his three children. Id. Plaintiff has two houses with about $1 million in total 18 debt. Id. 19 Thus, Plaintiff has indicated a regular source of income and a large sum of funds 20 in cash or in a bank account. While § 1915(a) does not require a litigant to be “absolutely 21 destitute,” Adkins, 335 U.S. at 339, the applicant must nonetheless show inability to pay 22 the fees. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Plaintiff has not done so. 23 Because Plaintiff does not make an adequate showing of indigency for in forma 24 pauperis status, Plaintiff will be granted 30 days from the date these findings and 25 recommendations are adopted in which to submit the filing fee and administrative fee to 26 the Clerk of the Court in order to proceed with this case. Plaintiff is cautioned that failure 27 to pay the court costs will result in a recommendation that the application to proceed in 28 forma pauperis be denied and the present action be dismissed. 1 | Ill. CONCLUSION 2 In conclusion, IT |S HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 3 1. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) be DENIED; 4 and 5 2. Plaintiff shall pay the filing fee and administrative fee within thirty (30) days 6 from the date these findings and recommendations are adopted. 7 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 8 || Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within 9 | 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file 10 | written objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. This document should 11 | be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any 12 | reply to the objections shall be served on all parties and filed with the Court within 14 13 | days after service of the objections. Failure to file objections within the specified time 14 | may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 15 | 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir. 1991). 16 17 || Dated: September 29, 2025 C iy S \U 18 CHI SOO KIM 49 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20 | 5, tand.2111.25 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28