Opinion

Ashford v. Google, Inc

Court
District Court, S.D. California
Filed
Feb 19, 2025
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 34.1%

The opinion

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11 BURK ASHFORD Case No.: 25-cv-0327-BJC-AHG

12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

13 v. PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS,

14 GOOGLE INC., et al, [ECF No. 3]

15 Defendants.

16

17

18 On February 12, 2025, Plaintiff Burk Ashford, filed a Petition for Preliminary

19 Injunction alleging Defendants Google and Yahoo have locked him out of his personal

20 email accounts, and he seeks “unfettered access to his email accounts from wherever he

21 may be.” [ECF No. 1.] Plaintiff did not prepay the filing fees required by 28 U.S.C. §

22 1914(a) at the time of filing; instead, he filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis

23 (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). For the reasons stated herein, his motion is

24 DENIED.

25 Generally, all parties instituting a civil action in this court must pay a filing fee. See

26 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); CivLR 4.5(a). However, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the court

27 may authorize the commencement, prosecution, or defense of any suit without payment

28 of fees if the plaintiff submits an affidavit, including a statement of all his or her assets,

1 || showing that he or she is unable to pay filing fees or costs. “An affidavit in support of an

2 || IFP application is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and

3 || still afford the necessities of life.” Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir.

4 ||2015). “[A] plaintiff seeking IFP status must allege poverty with some particularity,

5 || definiteness and certainty.” /d. (internal quotation marks omitted). The granting or denial

6 leave to proceed IFP in civil cases is within the sound discretion of the district court.

7 || Venerable v. Meyers, 500 F.2d 1215, 1216 (9th Cir. 1974) (citations omitted).

8 In his application, Plaintiff states that he has $1,310 in monthly income from Social

9 || Security, he has $426.68 in a bank account, and his monthly expenses are $885. Based on

10 || Plaintiff's income, expenses, and bank account, it appears that he has funds to pay the

11 || filing fee and still “afford the necessities of life.” Escobedo, 787 F.3d at 1234.

12 For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE

13 || Plaintiff’s IFP Motion [ECF No. 3.] Plaintiff shall have until March 18, 2025, to pay the

14 || entire filing fee or file a renewed application to proceed IFP. Failure to pay the filing fee

15 |! or file a renewed application to proceed IFP will result in this case being closed without

16 || further order from the Court.

17 IT IS SO ORDERED.

18

19 Dated: February 19, 2025

20

1 6 pap C24, a fa

22

23 Honorable Benjamin J. Cheeks

United States District Judge

24

25

26

27

28

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.