# Ashford v. Google, Inc

> District Court, S.D. California · April 29, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10881947

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, S.D. California
- **Decided:** April 29, 2025
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10881947

## Opinion text

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 BURK N. ASHFORD, Case No.: 25-cv-0327-BJC-AHG
12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION
13 v. TO TO PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS [ECF NO. 7]
14 GOOGLE, et al,
15 Defendants.
16
17
18 On February 12, 2025, Plaintiff Burk N. 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 filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
22 (“IFP”) which the Court denied on February 19, 2025. [ECF Nos. 3, 4.]
23 Plaintiff has filed a Renewed Application for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
24 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). [ECF No. 7.] For the reasons stated below, his motion is
25 GRANTED.
26 Generally, all parties instituting a civil action in this court must pay a filing fee. See
27 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); Civ.L.R. 4.5(a). However, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the court
28 may authorize the commencement, prosecution, or defense of any suit without payment
| ||of fees if the plaintiff submits an affidavit, including a statement of all his or her assets,
2 || showing that he or she is unable to pay filing fees or costs. “An affidavit in support of an
3 || IFP application is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and
4 ||still afford the necessities of life.” Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir.
5 ||2015). “[A] plaintiff seeking IFP status must allege poverty with some particularity,
6 || definiteness and certainty.” /d. (internal quotation marks omitted). The granting or denial
7 ||of leave to proceed IFP in civil cases is within the sound discretion of the district court.
8 || Venerable v. Meyers, 500 F.2d 1215, 1216 (9th Cir. 1974) (citations omitted).
9 In his application, Plaintiff states that he receives $1,310 in monthly income from
10 }/‘“Pension, annuity, or life insurance payments.” [ECF No. 7 at 4.] Plaintiff states his
11 ||/monthly expenses include $600 rent, $35 telephone, and that his utilities and medical co-
12 || pays vary. [/d. at 5.] Plaintiff states he has $97.39 in his Chase account. [/d. at 7.] Although
13 ||he does not provide an accurate accounting of his monthly expenses, Plaintiff's income
14 || and bank account indicate that he does not have funds to pay the filing fee and still “afford
15 necessities of life.” Escobedo, 787 F.3d at 1234. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS
16 || Plaintiff’?s IFP Motion [ECF No. 7.]
17 IT IS SO ORDERED.
18 ||Dated: April 29, 2025
19
20 6 oq Gan CG Lh fu
21
29 Honorable Benjamin J. Cheeks
United States District Judge
23
24
25
26
27
28

1
2
3
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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10881947. Public record. Not legal advice.