Lamont Deangelo Ferebee v. Bellagio Hotel & Casino

Opinion

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 * * * 5 Lamont Deangelo Ferebee, Case No. 2:26-cv-01824-CDS-DJA 6 Plaintiff, 7 Order v. 8 Bellagio Hotel & Casino, 9 Defendant. 10 11 Pro se Plaintiff Lamont Deangelo Ferebee filed an application to proceed in forma 12 pauperis (which means to proceed without paying the filing fee). (ECF No. 1). However, 13 Plaintiff’s application is missing certain information. The Court thus denies Plaintiff’s 14 application without prejudice. 15 I. Discussion. 16 Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), a plaintiff may bring a civil action “without prepayment of 17 fees or security therefor” if the plaintiff submits a financial affidavit that demonstrates the 18 plaintiff “is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.” The Ninth Circuit has recognized 19 that “there is no formula set forth by statute, regulation, or case law to determine when someone 20 is poor enough to earn [in forma pauperis] status.” Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1235 21 (9th Cir. 2015). An applicant need not be destitute to qualify for a waiver of costs and fees, but 22 he must demonstrate that because of his poverty he cannot pay those costs and still provide 23 himself with the necessities of life. Adkins v. E.I DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 24 (1948). 25 The applicant’s affidavit must state the facts regarding the individual’s poverty “with 26 some particularity, definiteness and certainty.” United States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 27 (9th Cir. 1981) (citation omitted). If an individual is unable or unwilling to verify his or her 1 status and to deny a request to proceed in forma pauperis. See, e.g., Marin v. Hahn, 271 2 Fed.Appx. 578 (9th Cir. 2008) (finding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by 3 denying the plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis because he “failed to verify his 4 poverty adequately”). “Such affidavit must include a complete statement of the plaintiff’s 5 personal assets.” Harper v. San Diego City Admin. Bldg., No. 16-cv-00768 AJB (BLM), 2016 6 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192145, at *1 (S.D. Cal. June 9, 2016). Misrepresentation of assets is sufficient 7 grounds for denying an in forma pauperis application. Cf. Kennedy v. Huibregtse, 831 F.3d 441, 8 443-44 (7th Cir. 2016) (affirming dismissal with prejudice after litigant misrepresented assets on 9 in forma pauperis application). 10 Plaintiff leaves two portions of his application blank. He does not provide any response to 11 question 8, so the Court cannot determine if that question does not apply to him or if he forgot to 12 respond to it. Plaintiff has also left the line for his signature blank. But Plaintiff must sign his 13 application. 14 Given these issues, the Court cannot determine whether Plaintiff qualifies for in forma 15 pauperis status. The Court will give Plaintiff one opportunity to file a complete in forma 16 pauperis application on this Court’s application. The Court further orders that Plaintiff may not 17 respond with a zero or “not applicable” in response to any question without providing an 18 explanation for each of the questions. Plaintiff also may not leave any questions blank. 19 The Court denies Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis application without prejudice. The Court 20 gives Plaintiff 30 days to file an updated application. Plaintiff must fully answer all applicable 21 questions and check all applicable boxes. Plaintiff may alternatively pay the filing fee in full. 22 Since the Court denies Plaintiff’s application, it does not screen the complaint at this time. 23 However, the Court informs Plaintiff that he has also not signed his complaint (ECF No. 1-1 at 3) 24 and that Plaintiff may not proceed with an unsigned complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. Plaintiff 25 must file a signed complaint along with his filing fee or renewed application to proceed in forma 26 pauperis. 27 /// 1 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma 2 pauperis (ECF No. 1) is denied without prejudice. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff has until July 17, 2026, to (1) file an 4 updated application to proceed in forma pauperis as specified in this order or pay the filing fee; 5 and (2) file a signed complaint. Failure to timely comply with this order may result in a 6 recommendation to the district judge that this case be dismissed. 7 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is kindly directed to send Plaintiff 8 a copy of this order and of the Short Form application to proceed in forma pauperis and its 9 instructions.1 10 11 DATED: June 17, 2026, 12 DANIEL J. ALBREGTS 13 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

27 1 This form and its instructions can also be found at https://www.nvd.uscourts.gov/court-