Kirk D. Williams v. Panda Express (P.R.) Inc.
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Dana M. Sabraw (author)
Analysis
The court considered a pro se plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis in a civil rights action. The court denied the motion because the plaintiff failed to complete all required fields on the affidavit, and dismissed the action without prejudice.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Denial of Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis“Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is DENIED.” | agree with court The court correctly applied the requirement that an IFP applicant must provide a complete affidavit. The order recites that the plaintiff left required fields blank (spousal income, employment history, etc.) and cited Local Rule 3.2(a) and the standard from Escobedo v. Applebees. Denying the motion based on an incomplete affidavit is a standard procedural mechanism to ensure the court has sufficient information to determine indigency. |
Dismissal of the action without prejudice“Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice.” | agree with court Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2), if a court denies IFP status, it must dismiss the action unless the plaintiff pays the filing fee. The court provided a 30-day window to pay or renew the motion, which is consistent with the statute and local practice. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It correctly identifies the statutory basis for the filing fee and the IFP exception. It accurately applies the Ninth Circuit standard from Escobedo and the local rules regarding the completeness of the affidavit. The reasoning directly addresses the deficiency in the plaintiff's filing (blank fields) and provides the required remedy (dismissal without prejudice and an opportunity to cure).
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 Case No.: 25-cv-02763-DMS-JAC 9 KIRK D. WILLIAMS, 10 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 11 v. MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS PANDA EXPRESS (P.R.) INC., 12 13 Defendant. 14 15 16 17 On October 16, 2025, Plaintiff Kirk D. Williams, proceeding pro se, filed this action 18 against Defendant Panda Express (P.R.) Inc., alleging violations of the Americans with 19 Disabilities Act and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. (ECF No. 1); 42 U.S.C. §§ 20 12101–12213; Cal. Civ. Code § 51 (West 2026). Plaintiff concurrently filed a Motion to 21 Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“Motion”), which is currently pending before the Court. 22 (Mot., ECF No. 2). For the following reasons, the Court denies Plaintiff’s Motion and 23 dismisses the action without prejudice. 24 I. MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 25 Parties instituting a civil action in a United States district court must pay a filing fee 26 27 28 1 of $405. 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a)–(b). However, a court may authorize a party to proceed in 2 forma pauperis (“IFP”) without the prepayment of fees if the party submits an affidavit 3 demonstrating their inability to pay. § 1915(a)(1); see CivLR 3.2(a) (listing specific 4 requirements for the affidavit). Although a party need not be “absolutely destitute” to 5 proceed IFP, they must “allege poverty with some particularity, definiteness and certainty” 6 such that they could not “pay the court costs and still afford the necessities of life.” 7 Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015) (citation modified). 8 Plaintiff’s Motion consists of an Application to Proceed in District Court Without 9 Prepaying Fees or Costs (Form AO 239). (Mot. 1). The form instructs the affiant to 10 “[c]omplete all questions” and not to “leave any blanks: if the answer to a question is ‘0,’ 11 ‘none,’ or ‘not applicable (N/A),’ write that response.” (Id.). Plaintiff reports $0.00 in 12 average monthly income from all sources, $0.00 in money owed to him, and $0.00 in 13 average monthly expenses. (Id. at 2, 3, 5). The Motion also indicates that Plaintiff does 14 not own a home, real estate, or a motor vehicle, does not expect any changes to his monthly 15 income or expenses in the next twelve months, and will not be spending any money on 16 attorney fees in conjunction with this lawsuit. (Id. at 3, 5). However, the remainder of the 17 form is blank, leaving unanswered questions about spousal income or assets, employment 18 history, and money in Plaintiff’s possession. (Id. at 1–5). These answers are required 19 pursuant to the Local Rules and their absence leaves the Court unable to properly assess 20 Plaintiff’s inability to pay fees. See CivLR 3.2(a) (listing required information including 21 the answers to questions Plaintiff left blank). 22 II. CONCLUSION AND ORDER 23 For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is 24 DENIED. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. Within thirty days 25 26 1 The $405 fee consists of a $350 filing fee mandated by § 1914(a) and a $55 administrative fee prescribed 27 by the Judicial Conference of the United States pursuant to § 1914(b). See Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees, District Court Misc. Fee Schedule, § 14 (eff. Dec. 1, 2023). However, the filing fee for an 28 1 ||of the issuance of this Order, Plaintiff may file a renewed motion or pay the $405 filing 2 If Plaintiff does neither, the Clerk of Court is instructed to close this case. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 || Dated: July 20, 2026 2» J \ 5 rn Yn. 6 Hon. Dana M. Sabraw 7 United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28