Parr v. United States

W.D. Washington

Parr v. United States

DecidedApril 1, 2025

Docket2:25-cv-00538

StatusUnknown

This text of Parr v. United States (Parr v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Parr v. United States, (W.D. Wash. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 6 7 VICTORIA A. PARR, 8 Plaintiff, CASE NO. 2:25-cv-00538-LK 9 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING APPLICATION TO 10 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 11 Defendants.

12 Plaintiff has filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) in this case. Dkt. 1. 13 In the IFP application, Plaintiff indicates she receives no income, has no money on hand in cash 14 or accounts, owns no valuable property, has no dependents, and incurs no monthly expenses. Id. 15 at 1-2. When asked to provide any other information explaining why she cannot pay court fees 16 and costs, Plaintiff responded, “temporary housing. Richard Troberman has the case county 17 afterward.” Id. at 2. 18 The district court may permit indigent litigants to proceed IFP upon completion of a 19 proper affidavit of indigence. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). “To qualify for in forma pauperis status, a 20 civil litigant must demonstrate both that the litigant is unable to pay court fees and that the 21 claims he or she seeks to pursue are not frivolous.” Ogunsalu v. Nair, 117 F. App’x 522, 523 22 (9th Cir. 2004), cert. denied, 544 U.S. 1051 (2005). To meet the first prong of this test, a litigant 23 must show that she “cannot because of [her] poverty pay or give security for the costs and still be 1 able to provide [herself] and dependents with the necessities of life.” Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de 2 Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948). 3 Plaintiff’s application omits information necessary for the Court to determine her ability 4 to pay court fees and costs. Plaintiff does not, for example, inform the Court how she pays for

5 food, shelter, or other basic necessities of life. Plaintiff should not, under these circumstances, be 6 authorized to proceed IFP. 7 Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED to show cause by April 29, 2025, why the Court 8 should not recommend her IFP application be denied. The Clerk is directed to send copies of this 9 Order to Plaintiff and to the Honorable Lauren King. 10 Dated this 1st day of April, 2025. 11 A 12 BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA United States Magistrate Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 6 7 VICTORIA A. PARR, 8 Plaintiff, CASE NO. 2:25-cv-00538-LK 9 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING APPLICATION TO 10 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 11 Defendants.

12 Plaintiff has filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) in this case. Dkt. 1. 13 In the IFP application, Plaintiff indicates she receives no income, has no money on hand in cash 14 or accounts, owns no valuable property, has no dependents, and incurs no monthly expenses. Id. 15 at 1-2. When asked to provide any other information explaining why she cannot pay court fees 16 and costs, Plaintiff responded, “temporary housing. Richard Troberman has the case county 17 afterward.” Id. at 2. 18 The district court may permit indigent litigants to proceed IFP upon completion of a 19 proper affidavit of indigence. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). “To qualify for in forma pauperis status, a 20 civil litigant must demonstrate both that the litigant is unable to pay court fees and that the 21 claims he or she seeks to pursue are not frivolous.” Ogunsalu v. Nair, 117 F. App’x 522, 523 22 (9th Cir. 2004), cert. denied, 544 U.S. 1051 (2005). To meet the first prong of this test, a litigant 23 must show that she “cannot because of [her] poverty pay or give security for the costs and still be 1 able to provide [herself] and dependents with the necessities of life.” Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de 2 Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948). 3 Plaintiff’s application omits information necessary for the Court to determine her ability 4 to pay court fees and costs. Plaintiff does not, for example, inform the Court how she pays for

5 food, shelter, or other basic necessities of life. Plaintiff should not, under these circumstances, be 6 authorized to proceed IFP. 7 Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED to show cause by April 29, 2025, why the Court 8 should not recommend her IFP application be denied. The Clerk is directed to send copies of this 9 Order to Plaintiff and to the Honorable Lauren King. 10 Dated this 1st day of April, 2025. 11 A 12 BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA United States Magistrate Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Parr v. United States, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parr-v-united-states-wawd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack