Diaz v. O' Malley

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PRICILLA JESSE D. Case No.: 24-cv-637-DDL 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING 13 v. APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 14 MARTIN O’MALLEY, 15 Commissioner of Social Security, [Dkt. No. 2] Defendant. 16 17 18 On April 4, 2024, pro se Plaintiff Pricilla Jesse D. (“Plaintiff”) initiated this 19 action against the Acting Commissioner of Social Security, seeking judicial review 20 of a final adverse decision of the Commissioner. Dkt. No. 1. Plaintiff concurrently 21 filed an application to proceed in this matter in forma pauperis (“IFP”), which is 22 presently before the Court. Dkt. No. 2. 23 This Court may “authorize the commencement . . . of any suit, action or 24 proceeding, civil or criminal, without prepayment of fees or security therefor” by 25 any person who demonstrates his or her inability to pay such fees. See 28 U.S.C. 26 § 1915(a)(1). A party need not be completely destitute to proceed IFP. Adkins v. 27 E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339-40 (1948). Instead, “[a]n 28 affidavit in support of an IFP application is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant 1 ||cannot pay the court costs and still afford the necessities of life.” Escobedo v. 2 || Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1235 (9th Cir. 2015) (citing Adkins, 335 U.S. at 339). 3 || “[A] plaintiff seeking IFP status must allege poverty ‘with some particularity, 4 ||definiteness and certainty.” /d. (citing United States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 5 (9th Cir.1981)). 6 Here, Plaintiff avers she has no income and is unable to work. Dkt. No. 2 at 7 ||5. Plaintiff receives $291.00 in public assistance but has no other income or 8 ||assets. /d. at 1-4. Based upon the record before it, the Court finds that Plaintiff 9 ||has adequately demonstrated that she lacks the financial resources to pay the 10 filing fee. Accordingly, plaintiff's Application to Proceed in forma pauperis [Dkt. No. 11 is GRANTED. 12 The Court must dismiss an IFP complaint if it fails to state a claim upon which 13 ||relief can be granted, is frivolous or malicious, or seeks monetary relief from a 14 ||defendant who is immune. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Rule 2(b) of the 15 Supplemental Rules for Social Security Actions sets forth additional pleading 16 requirements for a Social Security complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. SUPP SS Rule 17 2(b)(1)(A)-(E). Plaintiff has filled out and filed a template complaint, attached to 18 ||which are an assortment of documents relating to her application for Social 19 ||Security benefits. Dkt. No. 1. The Court has carefully reviewed Plaintiffs 20 ||complaint and the attachments to it, and finds the pleading requirements of Rule 21 2(b)(1)(A)-(E) are met. The Court further finds Plaintiff's complaint states a 22 ||plausible claim for relief and is neither frivolous nor malicious, and therefore 23 || Survives screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). 24 IS SO ORDERED. 25 || Dated: May 24, 2024 inte 26 Tb Lhe □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ 28 United States Magistrate Judge