Richard Smith, Sr. v. Regents of the University of Michigan, et al.

• Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan
• Decided: January 29, 2026
• Docket: 5:25-cv-13980
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Richard Smith, Sr.,

Plaintiff, Case No. 25-cv-13980

v. Judith E. Levy United States District Judge Regents of the University of Michigan, et al., Mag. Judge Elizabeth A. Stafford Defendants.

________________________________/

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO SUBMIT A COMPLETE APPLICATION TO PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYING FEES AND COSTS

On December 17, 2025, the Court ordered Plaintiff Richard Smith, Sr., to submit a complete Application to Proceed Without Prepaying Fees and Costs. (ECF No. 9.) This application is also referred to as application to proceed “in forma pauperis.” On January 13, 2026, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and motion for waiver of all fees, costs, and pacer charges. (ECF No. 18.) Under 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), plaintiffs in any civil action must pay a filing fee of $405.00 to the Court. If plaintiffs are unable to pay the filing fee, they must document their financial need by completing and submitting an “Application to Proceed in District Court Without

Prepaying Fees or Costs” to the Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). An individual need not be “absolutely destitute to enjoy the benefits” of

proceeding in forma pauperis. Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours, Inc., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948). Proceeding in forma pauperis is “a privilege, not a right, and permission to so proceed is committed to the sound

discretion of the court.” Camp v. Oliver, 798 F.2d 434, 437 (11th Cir. 1986). “In determining [in forma pauperis] eligibility, courts will generally look to whether the persons are employed, the person’s annual

salary, and any other property or assets the person may possess.” Cognetto v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11910, 2014 WL 358465, at *1 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 31, 2014) (internal quotation marks

omitted). If a plaintiff fails to pay the filing fee or apply to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court may exercise its discretion and dismiss the case.

Davis v. United States, 73 F. App’x 804, 805 (6th Cir. 2003); see also E.D. Mich. LR 41.2. Inadequate completion of an application to proceed in forma pauperis is grounds for denial of that application in the Eastern District of Michigan. See Shaw v. Oakland Cty. Friend of the Ct., No. 20- 12492, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222335, 2020 WL 7024912, at *3 (E.D.

Mich. Nov. 30, 2020). As of the date of this order, Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee or

filed a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis. Federal courts “may authorize the commencement . . . of any suit, action or proceeding . . . without prepayment of fees . . . by a person who

submits an affidavit that includes a statement . . . that the person is unable to pay such fees.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) (emphasis added). A motion seeking to proceed in forma pauperis must therefore be supported

by an affidavit asserting Plaintiff’s inability to pay the required fees. See id. The Eastern District of Michigan’s website offers an application form that complies with 28 U.S.C. § 1915’s requirements. Uɴɪᴛᴇᴅ Sᴛᴀᴛᴇꜱ

Dɪꜱᴛʀɪᴄᴛ Cᴏᴜʀᴛ ꜰᴏʀ ᴛʜᴇ Eᴀꜱᴛᴇʀɴ Dɪꜱᴛʀɪᴄᴛ ᴏꜰ Mɪᴄʜɪɢᴀɴ, MIED 240 (01/2025) Aᴘᴘʟɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴏɴ ᴛᴏ Pʀᴏᴄᴇᴇᴅ ɪɴ Dɪꜱᴛʀɪᴄᴛ Cᴏᴜʀᴛ ᴡɪᴛʜᴏᴜᴛ Pʀᴇᴘᴀʏɪɴɢ Fᴇᴇꜱ ᴏʀ Cᴏꜱᴛꜱ (Sʜᴏʀᴛ Fᴏʀᴍ) (2025).

Here, Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is not accompanied by an affidavit nor has Plaintiff used the application form provided by the Court. Therefore, Plaintiff has failed to submit a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis. See Walton v. Wheatly Co., No. 92-3379, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 3507, at *9 (6th Cir. Feb. 19,

1993) (affirming denial of in forma pauperis status where plaintiffs’ affidavits of poverty were inadequate).

Accordingly, Plaintiff must pay the filing fee or submit a completed Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs by February 17, 2026. If Plaintiff fails to comply, the case may be

dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Eastern District of Michigan Local Rule 41.2 or for failure to comply with the Court’s order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The Court cannot address any pending

motions or requests in this case until Plaintiff has demonstrated full compliance with this order. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 28, 2026 s/Judith E. Levy Ann Arbor, Michigan JUDITH E. LEVY United States District Judge

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court’s ECF System to their respective email or first-class U.S. mail addresses disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on January 28, 2026. s/William Barkholz William Barkholz Case Manager