Sergey Firsov v. SkyWest Airlines, Inc., et al.

• Court: District Court, N.D. California
• Decided: January 26, 2026
• Docket: 5:26-cv-00343
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 SERGEY FIRSOV, Case No. 26-cv-00343-SVK 8 Plaintiff, CORRECTED ORDER RE APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN 9 v. FORMA PAUPERIS 10 SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC., et al., Re: Dkt. No. 3 11 Defendants. 12 Self-represented plaintiff Sergey Firsov has filed an application to proceed in forma 13 pauperis (“IFP”). Dkt. 3. Having reviewed Plaintiff’s IFP application, the relevant law and the 14 record in this matter, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s IFP application. 15 A district court may authorize a plaintiff to proceed in forma pauperis if the court is 16 satisfied the would-be plaintiff cannot pay the filing fees required to pursue the lawsuit. See 28 17 U.S.C. § (a)(1). “The right to proceed without prepayment of fees in a civil case is a privilege and 18 not a right.” Elmer v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 22-cv-01045-SAB, 2022 WL 5237463, at *1 (E.D. 19 Cal. Sept. 21, 2022), report and recommendation adopted, No. 22-cv-1045-AWI-SAB, 2022 WL 20 9452375 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 14, 2022) (citing Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, Unit II Men’s 21 Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194, 198 n.2 (1993)). “In order to proceed in court without 22 prepayment of the filing fee, a plaintiff must submit an affidavit demonstrating that he ‘is unable 23 to pay such fees or give security therefor.’ ” Id. (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1)). 24 This Court, as well as “numerous other judges in this District across [a multitude of] other 25 cases arising [predominantly] from Mr. Firsov’s air travel have [] denied his IFP applications 26 when presented with similar financial information” to that presented in Plaintiff’s affidavit. See 27 L.F. by & Through Firsov v. Church of Scientology of Silicon Valley, No. 25-cv-03265-SVK, ] review, the total number of cases filed within the past year by Plaintiff is now 21 — none granting 2 || IFP status). The IFP application in this case contains two changes in status averred to by Plaintiff: 3 (1) “due [to a] crisis in IT” at his employer, his salary was decreased beginning October 13, 2025 4 and is now a net of $6,600 per month; and (2) as of November 10, 2025, he “is homeless ... 5 according to order of the Superior court of Santa Clara.” See Dkt. 3 at 1-3. 6 “[T]here is no formula set forth by statute, regulation, or case law to determine when 7 || someone is poor enough to earn IFP status.” Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1235 (9th 8 Cir. 2015). On the record before it, the Court does not find either change sufficient to afford 9 Plaintiff IFP status. First, while Plaintiffs income has decreased, his income remains substantial 10 || at $6,600 per month, (see Dkt. 3 at 1) and, based on Plaintiff's complaint, (Dkt. 1), he continues 11 purchasing airline travel tickets and exercise discretionary spending at a level that belies his 12 inability to pay the filing fee for this action. See Dkt. 1 at 4-5 (e.g., on December 2 and 28, well 5 13 after his reduction in salary, Plaintiff purchased multiple airline travel tickets valued in total at 14 || approximately $1,000 in sum); see also Firsov v. Alaska Airlines, No. 25-cv-2841-NW (NC), 3 15 || Dkt. 10 at 2 (finding that Plaintiff had “not shown that he could not afford to pay the Court filing 16 || fee if he adjusted or deferred other of his discretionary expenses.”). Second, while homelessness 5 17 || Or inability to pay rent would tell in favor of IFP status, Plaintiffs application is inconsistent on 5 1g || this matter: Despite averring that he is homeless, he claims a monthly expense of $2,300 in rent 19 || owed. Compare Dkt. 3 at 3 with id. at 4. 20 Accordingly, Plaintiff's IFP application is DENIED. Plaintiff must pay the entire filing 1 fee of $405.00 in full by no later than February 23, 2026. Failure to timely pay the filing fee 97 || may result in dismissal of this action without prejudice. 23 SO ORDERED. 5 Dated: January 26, 2026 26 Seesen vat SUSAN VAN KEULEN 28 United States Magistrate Judge