Veronica Segura o/b/o A.G.V. v. Commissioner of Social Security

E.D. California

Veronica Segura o/b/o A.G.V. v. Commissioner of Social Security

DecidedSeptember 26, 2025

Docket1:25-cv-01103

StatusUnknown

This text of Veronica Segura o/b/o A.G.V. v. Commissioner of Social Security (Veronica Segura o/b/o A.G.V. v. Commissioner of Social Security) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Veronica Segura o/b/o A.G.V. v. Commissioner of Social Security, (E.D. Cal. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 Case No. 1:25-cv-01103-BAM

13 ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO RANDOMLY ASSIGN DISTRICT 14 VERONICA SEGURA o/b/o A.G.V., JUDGE

15 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING PLAINTIFF’S 16 v. APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS BE DENIED 17 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR 18 APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM Defendant. OF A.G.V. 19 (Docs. 2, 3, 5) 20 FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE 21 22 On August 29, 2025, Plaintiff Veronica Segura on behalf of minor A.G.V. (“Plaintiff”), 23 through counsel, filed this action seeking judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner 24 of the Social Security Administration. (Doc. 1.) On the same day, Veronica Segura filed an 25 application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Doc. 2.) On 26 September 3, 2025, the Court ordered Veronica Segura to file a long form application to proceed 27 IFP. (Doc. 4.) On September 24, 2025, Veronica Segura filed a long form IFP application. 28 (Doc. 5.) Additionally, Veronica Segura petitions for appointment as guardian ad litem for her 1 child, A.G.V., a minor. (Doc. 3.) Both motions are currently before the Court. 2 I. IFP 3 According to Veronica Segura’s long form application, she receives $3,000 per month in 4 average monthly income through her employment. (Doc. 5 at 1.) Her spouse receives $2,500 per 5 month in average monthly income through his employment. (Id.) Veronica Segura notes that her 6 spouse is employed as a farm laborer and works seasonally. (Id. at 5.) The Court will presume 7 that Veronica Segura accurately reflected her spouse’s income as “average monthly income 8 amount during the past 12 months” as instructed by the directions, to accommodate the seasonal 9 nature of her spouse’s employment. (Id. at 1) (emphasis added). This amounts to an annual 10 income of $66,000 ($5,500 x 12 months = $ 66,000). Veronica Segura lists four minor children 11 as dependents. (Id. at 3.) 12 “To satisfy the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915, applicants must demonstrate that 13 because of poverty, they cannot meet court costs and still provide themselves, and any 14 dependents, with the necessities of life.” Soldani v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 1:19-cv-00040, 15 2019 WL 2160380, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2019). Many courts look to the federal poverty 16 guidelines set by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) as a 17 guidepost in evaluating in forma pauperis applications. See Martinez v. Kristi Kleaners, Inc., 364 18 F.3d 1305, 1307 n.5 (11th Cir. 2004); Boulas v. United States Postal Serv., No. 1:18-cv-01163- 19 LJO-BAM, 2018 WL 6615075, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2018) (applying federal poverty 20 guidelines to in forma pauperis application). For a family or household of six, the 2025 poverty 21 guideline is $43,150. See U.S. Federal Poverty Guidelines Used to Determine Financial 22 Eligibility for Certain Federal Programs, available at https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty- 23 economic-mobility/poverty-guidelines (last visited September 25, 2025). 24 Having considered Veronica Segura’s application, the Court finds that she has not made 25 the showing required by section 1915 that she is unable to pay the required fees for this action. 26 Veronica Segura’s household estimated annual income exceeds the federal poverty guidelines. In 27 light of this, there is no indication that Veronica Segura is unable to pay the filing fee while also 28 providing for the necessities of life. 1 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY DIRECTED to randomly assign a 2 District Judge to this action. 3 II. Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem 4 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17 provides that “[t]he court must appoint a guardian ad 5 litem—or issue another appropriate order—to protect a minor or incompetent person who is 6 unrepresented in an action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2). This requires a district court to take 7 whatever measures it deems proper to protect the individual during litigation. United States v. 8 30.64 Acres of Land, 795 F.2d 796, 805 (9th Cir. 1986). In pertinent part, Local Rule 202(a) of 9 this Court further states:

10 Upon commencement of an action or upon initial appearance in defense of an action by or on behalf of a minor or incompetent person, the attorney representing the 11 minor or incompetent person shall present . . . a motion for the appointment of a guardian ad litem by the Court, or . . . a showing satisfactory to the Court that no 12 such appointment is necessary to ensure adequate representation of the minor or incompetent person. 13 14 See L.R. 202(a). The decision to appoint a guardian ad litem “must normally be left to the sound 15 discretion of the trial court.” 30.64 Acres, 795 F.2d at 804. 16 “[W]hen a parent brings an action on behalf of a child, and it is evident that the interests 17 of each are the same, no need exists for someone other than the parent to represent the child’s 18 interests under Rule 17(c).” H.D.A. v. County of Stanislaus, No. 1:22-cv-00384-DAD-SAB, 2022 19 WL 992990, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 1, 2022) (quoting Gonzalez v. Reno, 86 F. Supp. 2d 1167, 1185 20 (S.D. Fla.), aff'd, 212 F.3d 1338 (11th Cir. 2000)). “While a parent is generally appointed as a 21 guardian ad litem, there are situations where the best interests of the minor and the interests of the 22 parent conflict.” Id. (citing Anthem Life Ins. Co. v. Olguin, No. 1:06-cv-01165 AWI NEW (TAG), 23 2007 WL 1390672, at *2 (E.D. Cal. May 9, 2007)). Therefore, a parent is not entitled as a matter 24 of right to act as guardian ad litem for the child. Id. 25 The Court has considered the petition and finds no apparent conflict that would preclude 26 A.G.V.’s mother from serving as guardian ad litem. The supporting declaration of Veronica 27 Segura indicates the following: (1) she is the mother of A.G.V., a minor; (2) she is familiar with 28 A.G.V.’s medical conditions; (3) A.G.V. has no general guardianship and no previous petition for 1 appointment of guardian ad litem; and (4) she is willing to act as guardian ad litem for the minor 2 A.G.V. (Doc. 3 at 1-2, Declaration of Veronica Segura ¶¶ 3-6.) Additionally, the petition 3 indicates that Veronica Segura is a competent and responsible person and fully competent to act 4 as a guardian ad litem. (Doc. 3 at 2.) 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Veronica Segura is appointed in this action 6 as guardian ad litem for A.G.V., a minor. 7 Furthermore, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 8 1. Veronica Segura’s applications to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs 9 (Docs. 2, 5) be DENIED; and 10 2. Plaintiff be required to pay the $405.00 filing fee in full to proceed with this 11 action. 12 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 13 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within 14 fourteen (14) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, the parties may 15 file written objections with the court.

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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 Case No. 1:25-cv-01103-BAM

13 ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO RANDOMLY ASSIGN DISTRICT 14 VERONICA SEGURA o/b/o A.G.V., JUDGE

15 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING PLAINTIFF’S 16 v. APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS BE DENIED 17 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR 18 APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM Defendant. OF A.G.V. 19 (Docs. 2, 3, 5) 20 FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE 21 22 On August 29, 2025, Plaintiff Veronica Segura on behalf of minor A.G.V. (“Plaintiff”), 23 through counsel, filed this action seeking judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner 24 of the Social Security Administration. (Doc. 1.) On the same day, Veronica Segura filed an 25 application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Doc. 2.) On 26 September 3, 2025, the Court ordered Veronica Segura to file a long form application to proceed 27 IFP. (Doc. 4.) On September 24, 2025, Veronica Segura filed a long form IFP application. 28 (Doc. 5.) Additionally, Veronica Segura petitions for appointment as guardian ad litem for her 1 child, A.G.V., a minor. (Doc. 3.) Both motions are currently before the Court. 2 I. IFP 3 According to Veronica Segura’s long form application, she receives $3,000 per month in 4 average monthly income through her employment. (Doc. 5 at 1.) Her spouse receives $2,500 per 5 month in average monthly income through his employment. (Id.) Veronica Segura notes that her 6 spouse is employed as a farm laborer and works seasonally. (Id. at 5.) The Court will presume 7 that Veronica Segura accurately reflected her spouse’s income as “average monthly income 8 amount during the past 12 months” as instructed by the directions, to accommodate the seasonal 9 nature of her spouse’s employment. (Id. at 1) (emphasis added). This amounts to an annual 10 income of $66,000 ($5,500 x 12 months = $ 66,000). Veronica Segura lists four minor children 11 as dependents. (Id. at 3.) 12 “To satisfy the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915, applicants must demonstrate that 13 because of poverty, they cannot meet court costs and still provide themselves, and any 14 dependents, with the necessities of life.” Soldani v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 1:19-cv-00040, 15 2019 WL 2160380, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2019). Many courts look to the federal poverty 16 guidelines set by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) as a 17 guidepost in evaluating in forma pauperis applications. See Martinez v. Kristi Kleaners, Inc., 364 18 F.3d 1305, 1307 n.5 (11th Cir. 2004); Boulas v. United States Postal Serv., No. 1:18-cv-01163- 19 LJO-BAM, 2018 WL 6615075, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2018) (applying federal poverty 20 guidelines to in forma pauperis application). For a family or household of six, the 2025 poverty 21 guideline is $43,150. See U.S. Federal Poverty Guidelines Used to Determine Financial 22 Eligibility for Certain Federal Programs, available at https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty- 23 economic-mobility/poverty-guidelines (last visited September 25, 2025). 24 Having considered Veronica Segura’s application, the Court finds that she has not made 25 the showing required by section 1915 that she is unable to pay the required fees for this action. 26 Veronica Segura’s household estimated annual income exceeds the federal poverty guidelines. In 27 light of this, there is no indication that Veronica Segura is unable to pay the filing fee while also 28 providing for the necessities of life. 1 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY DIRECTED to randomly assign a 2 District Judge to this action. 3 II. Petition for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem 4 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17 provides that “[t]he court must appoint a guardian ad 5 litem—or issue another appropriate order—to protect a minor or incompetent person who is 6 unrepresented in an action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2). This requires a district court to take 7 whatever measures it deems proper to protect the individual during litigation. United States v. 8 30.64 Acres of Land, 795 F.2d 796, 805 (9th Cir. 1986). In pertinent part, Local Rule 202(a) of 9 this Court further states:

10 Upon commencement of an action or upon initial appearance in defense of an action by or on behalf of a minor or incompetent person, the attorney representing the 11 minor or incompetent person shall present . . . a motion for the appointment of a guardian ad litem by the Court, or . . . a showing satisfactory to the Court that no 12 such appointment is necessary to ensure adequate representation of the minor or incompetent person. 13 14 See L.R. 202(a). The decision to appoint a guardian ad litem “must normally be left to the sound 15 discretion of the trial court.” 30.64 Acres, 795 F.2d at 804. 16 “[W]hen a parent brings an action on behalf of a child, and it is evident that the interests 17 of each are the same, no need exists for someone other than the parent to represent the child’s 18 interests under Rule 17(c).” H.D.A. v. County of Stanislaus, No. 1:22-cv-00384-DAD-SAB, 2022 19 WL 992990, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 1, 2022) (quoting Gonzalez v. Reno, 86 F. Supp. 2d 1167, 1185 20 (S.D. Fla.), aff'd, 212 F.3d 1338 (11th Cir. 2000)). “While a parent is generally appointed as a 21 guardian ad litem, there are situations where the best interests of the minor and the interests of the 22 parent conflict.” Id. (citing Anthem Life Ins. Co. v. Olguin, No. 1:06-cv-01165 AWI NEW (TAG), 23 2007 WL 1390672, at *2 (E.D. Cal. May 9, 2007)). Therefore, a parent is not entitled as a matter 24 of right to act as guardian ad litem for the child. Id. 25 The Court has considered the petition and finds no apparent conflict that would preclude 26 A.G.V.’s mother from serving as guardian ad litem. The supporting declaration of Veronica 27 Segura indicates the following: (1) she is the mother of A.G.V., a minor; (2) she is familiar with 28 A.G.V.’s medical conditions; (3) A.G.V. has no general guardianship and no previous petition for 1 appointment of guardian ad litem; and (4) she is willing to act as guardian ad litem for the minor 2 A.G.V. (Doc. 3 at 1-2, Declaration of Veronica Segura ¶¶ 3-6.) Additionally, the petition 3 indicates that Veronica Segura is a competent and responsible person and fully competent to act 4 as a guardian ad litem. (Doc. 3 at 2.) 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Veronica Segura is appointed in this action 6 as guardian ad litem for A.G.V., a minor. 7 Furthermore, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 8 1. Veronica Segura’s applications to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs 9 (Docs. 2, 5) be DENIED; and 10 2. Plaintiff be required to pay the $405.00 filing fee in full to proceed with this 11 action. 12 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 13 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within 14 fourteen (14) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, the parties may 15 file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to 16 Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Objections, if any, shall not exceed 17 fifteen (15) pages or include exhibits. Exhibits may be referenced by document and page 18 number if already in the record before the Court. Any pages filed in excess of the 15-page 19 limit may not be considered. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the 20 specified time may result in the waiver of the “right to challenge the magistrate’s factual 21 findings” on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838–39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter 22 v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24

25 Dated: September 25, 2025 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 26

27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Veronica Segura o/b/o A.G.V. v. Commissioner of Social Security, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/veronica-segura-obo-agv-v-commissioner-of-social-security-caed-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack