(SS) A.J.M v. Commissioner of Social Security

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: January 27, 2025
• Docket: 1:24-cv-01540
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 on behalf of A.J.M., Case No. 1:24-cv-01540-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, 7) 17 FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE 18 19 On December 16, 2024, Plaintiff Nancy Moreno on behalf of minor A.J.M. (“Plaintiff”), 20 through counsel, filed this action seeking judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner 21 of the Social Security Administration. (Doc. 1.) Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee and instead 22 filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Doc. 2.) On 23 December 18, 2024, the Court ordered Plaintiff to complete and file a long form application as 24 Plaintiff’s application was insufficient for the Court to determine if Plaintiff was entitled to 25 proceed without prepayment of fees in the action, noting that Plaintiff indicated that she and her 26 husband received $4,000.00 per month each from employment and that Plaintiff did not identify 27 the amount she contributed to dependents. (Doc. 4.) On January 8, 2025, Plaintiff filed a long 28 1 form motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 7.) 2 According to Plaintiff’s long form application, she receives monthly income from 3 employment in the amount of $4,000.00 per month and her spouse also receives monthly income 4 from employment in the amount of $4,000.00 per month. (Doc. 7 at 1-2.) This amounts to an 5 annual income of $96,000.00 ($8,000.00 x 12 months). Plaintiff lists two dependents – a 13-year- 6 old daughter and 11-year-old son. (Doc. 7 at 3.) Plaintiff also appears to provide some level of 7 support for her mother. (Id. at 3.) 8 “To satisfy the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915, applicants must demonstrate that 9 because of poverty, they cannot meet court costs and still provide themselves, and any 10 dependents, with the necessities of life.” Soldani v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 1:19-cv-00040, 11 2019 WL 2160380, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2019). Many courts look to the federal poverty 12 guidelines set by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) as a 13 guidepost in evaluating in forma pauperis applications. See Martinez v. Kristi Kleaners, Inc., 364 14 F.3d 1305, 1307 n.5 (11th Cir. 2004); Boulas v. United States Postal Serv., No. 1:18-cv-01163- 15 LJO-BAM, 2018 WL 6615075, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2018) (applying federal poverty 16 guidelines to in forma pauperis application). For a family or household of four, the 2025 poverty 17 guideline is $32,150, while the 2025 poverty guideline is $37,650 for a family or household of 18 five. See U.S. Federal Poverty Guidelines Used to Determine Financial Eligibility for Certain 19 Federal Programs, available at https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty-economic-mobility/poverty- 20 guidelines (last visited January 24, 2025). 21 Having considered Plaintiff’s application, the Court finds that she has not made the 22 showing required by section 1915 that she is unable to pay the required fees for this action. 23 Plaintiff has attested to household employment income that is more than double the federal 24 poverty guidelines. (Doc. 7.) In light of this, there is no indication that Plaintiff is unable to pay 25 the filing fee while also providing for the necessities of life. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court 26 is HEREBY DIRECTED to randomly assign a District Judge to this action. 27 /// 28 /// 1 Furthermore, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 2 1. Plaintiff’s application to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs (Docs. 2, 7) 3 be DENIED; and 4 2. Plaintiff be required to pay the $405.00 filing fee in full to proceed with this 5 action. 6 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 7 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 8 (14) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file written 9 objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 10 Findings and Recommendations.” Objections, if any, shall not exceed fifteen (15) pages or 11 include exhibits. Exhibits may be referenced by document and page number if already in 12 the record before the Court. Any pages filed in excess of the 15-page limit may not be 13 considered. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may 14 result in the waiver of the “right to challenge the magistrate’s factual findings” on appeal. 15 Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838–39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 16 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. 18

19 Dated: January 27, 2025 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20

22 23 24 25 26 27 28