The opinion
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
5
6
GARY SCOTT BROWN, CASE NUMBER: 1:23-cv-01168-GSA
7
Plaintiff,
8 FINDINGS AND
v. RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY
9 APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN
KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Commissioner of FORMA PAUPERIS AND TO
10 Social Security, REQUIRE FILING FEE PAYMENT,
AND DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT
11 TO RANDOMLY ASSIGN A UNITED
Defendant. STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
12
(Doc. 2)
13
14
15
16
17 On August 4, 2023 Plaintiff filed a complaint in this Court and applied to proceed without
18 prepayment of fees (in forma pauperis) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Docs. 1–2.
19 I. Legal Standard
20 In order to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, Plaintiff must submit an affidavit
21 demonstrating that he “is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).
22 “To proceed in forma pauperis is a privilege not a right.” Smart v. Heinze, 347 F.2d 114, 116 (9th
23 Cir. 1965). In enacting the in forma pauperis statute, “Congress intended to guarantee that no
24 citizen shall be denied an opportunity to commence, prosecute, or defend an action, civil or
25 criminal, in any court of the United States, solely because . . . poverty makes it impossible . . . to
26 pay or secure the costs of litigation.” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 31 (1992) (internal
27 quotations and citations omitted).
28 The determination whether a party may proceed in forma pauperis is a “matter within the
discretion of the trial court . . .” Weller v. Dickinson, 314 F.2d 598, 600 (9th Cir. 1963). To proceed
2
in forma pauperis a plaintiff need not demonstrate that he is completely destitute, but his poverty
3
must prevent him from paying the filing fee and providing himself and his dependents (if any) with
4
the necessities of life. Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339–40 (1948).
5
Although there is no bright line rule, courts look to the federal poverty guidelines developed each
6
year by the Department of Health and Human Services. See, e.g., Lint v. City of Boise, No. CV09-
7
72-S-EJL, 2009 WL 1149442, at *2 (D. Idaho Apr. 28, 2009) (and cases cited therein).
8
II. Findings
9
Plaintiff’s application reflects that his two-person household (1 spouse and no dependent
10
children) receives social security retirement income totaling $4,700 per month ($56,400) per year),
11
which is substantially in excess (about 300%) of the federal poverty guidelines for a household of
12
2 ($19,720).1
13
The application also reflects $7,000 in cash on hand between checking and savings
14
accounts. These facts strongly suggest the ability to pay the $402 filing fee without sacrificing the
15
necessities of daily life.
16
III. Recommendation
17
Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma
18
pauperis be denied (Doc. 2).
19
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to randomly assign this case to a United States District
20
Judge for resolution of these findings and recommendations pursuant to the provisions of Title 28
21
U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen (14) days from the filing of these findings and
22
recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the court. L.R. 304(b). Such a
23
document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.”
24
Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver
25
of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838–39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v.
26
Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).
27
28
1 See https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty-economic-mobility/poverty-guidelines
IT IS SO ORDERED.
2
Dated: August 8, 2023 /s/ Gary S. Austin
3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28