Walker v. Commissioner of Social Security

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

TINA WALKER,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:25-CV-00854-NJR

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

ROSENSTENGEL, Chief Judge: This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Tina Walker’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, that is, without prepayment of fees or costs (Doc. 4). A federal court may permit an indigent party to proceed in forma pauperis as long as the action is not clearly frivolous or malicious. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). The test for determining if an action is clearly frivolous or without merit is whether the plaintiff can make a rational argument on the law or facts in support of the claim. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Corgain v. Miller, 708 F.2d 1241, 1247 (7th Cir. 1983). When assessing a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, a district court should inquire into the merits of a plaintiff’s claims, and if the court finds them to be frivolous, it should deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Lucien v. Roegner, 682 F.2d 625, 626 (7th Cir. 1982). Here, the Court is satisfied from Walker’s affidavit that she is indigent. Furthermore, the Court does not find anything in the file to indicate that this action is frivolous or malicious. Therefore, the Court GRANTS the motion to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs (Doc. 4). The Court notes, however, that should it become apparent that the action is frivolous or malicious at any time in the future, it may dismiss the case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: June 12, 2025 7 (

NANCY J. ROSENSTENGEL Chief U.S. District Judge

Page 2 of 2