Senaida Macias Peña v. Commissioner of Social Security

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: October 20, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-01294
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SENAIDA MACIAS PEÑA, Case No. 1:25-cv-01294-BAM 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO RANDOMLY ASSIGN DISTRICT 13 v. JUDGE

14 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SECURITY, RECOMMENDING PLAINTIFF’S 15 APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED Defendant. IN FORMA PAUPERIS BE DENIED 16 (Docs. 2, 4) 17 FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE 18 19 On October 1, 2025, Plaintiff Senaida Macias Pena (“Plaintiff”), filed this action seeking 20 judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. 21 (Doc. 1.) Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee and instead filed an application to proceed in forma 22 pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Doc. 2). On October 2, the Court ordered Plaintiff to 23 file a long form application to proceed in forma pauperis on the basis that Plaintiff’s application 24 was insufficient for the Court to determine if Plaintiff is entitled to proceed without prepayment 25 of fees in this action. (Doc. 3.) On October 17, 2025, Plaintiff filed a long form application to 26 proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 4.) 27 According to Plaintiff’s application, she receives total monthly income from IHSS in the 28 amount of $3,092.75 per month. (Id. at 2.) This amounts to an annual income of $37,113 1 ($3,092.75 x 12 months = $37,113). Plaintiff lists her daughter as a dependent (id. at 3) and notes 2 that her husband is also dependent on her for support. (Doc. 2 at 2.) 3 “To satisfy the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915, applicants must demonstrate that 4 because of poverty, they cannot meet court costs and still provide themselves, and any 5 dependents, with the necessities of life.” Soldani v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 1:19-cv-00040, 6 2019 WL 2160380, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2019). Many courts look to the federal poverty 7 guidelines set by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) as a 8 guidepost in evaluating in forma pauperis applications. See Martinez v. Kristi Kleaners, Inc., 364 9 F.3d 1305, 1307 n.5 (11th Cir. 2004); Boulas v. United States Postal Serv., No. 1:18-cv-01163- 10 LJO-BAM, 2018 WL 6615075, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2018) (applying federal poverty 11 guidelines to in forma pauperis application). For a family or household of three, the 2025 12 poverty guideline is $26,650. See U.S. Federal Poverty Guidelines Used to Determine Financial 13 Eligibility for Certain Federal Programs, available at https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty- 14 economic-mobility/poverty-guidelines (last visited October 20, 2025). 15 Having considered Plaintiff’s application, the Court finds that Plaintiff has not made the 16 showing required by section 1915 that she is unable to pay the required fees for this action. 17 Plaintiff’s household estimated annual income exceeds that of the federal poverty guidelines. In 18 light of this, there is no indication that Plaintiff is unable to pay the filing fee while also providing 19 for the necessities of life. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY DIRECTED to 20 randomly assign a District Judge to this action. 21 Furthermore, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 22 1. Plaintiff’s application to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs (Docs. 2, 4) 23 be DENIED; and 24 2. Plaintiff be required to pay the $405.00 filing fee in full to proceed with this 25 action. 26 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 27 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within 28 fourteen (14) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, the parties may 1 file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to 2 Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Objections, if any, shall not exceed 3 fifteen (15) pages or include exhibits. Exhibits may be referenced by document and page 4 number if already in the record before the Court. Any pages filed in excess of the 15-page 5 limit may not be considered. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the 6 specified time may result in the waiver of the “right to challenge the magistrate’s factual 7 findings” on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838–39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter 8 v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10

11 Dated: October 20, 2025 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28