Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CESSALY D HUTCHINSON, Case No.: 26-CV-3098 JLS (JAC)

12 Plaintiff, ORDER: 13 v. (1) DENYING APPLICATION TO 14 GALE PINES NICHOLSON, et al., PROCEED IN DISTRICT COURT 15 Defendants. WITHOUT PREPAYING FEES OR COSTS, 16 17 (2) GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO ELECTRONICALLY 18 FILE DOCUMENTS, AND 19 (3) DISMISSING WITHOUT 20 PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S 21 COMPLAINT 22 (ECF Nos. 1, 2, 3). 23 24 Presently before the Court are pro se Plaintiff Cessaly D. Hutchinson’s Complaint 25 (“Compl.,” ECF No. 1), Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees 26 or Costs (“IFP Appl.,” ECF No. 2), and Motion for Leave to Electronically File Documents 27 (“Mot.,” ECF No. 3). Having carefully considered Plaintiff’s Complaint and the applicable 28 law, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Electronically File Documents 1 (ECF No. 3), DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s IFP Application (ECF No. 2 2), and DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s Complaint. 3 IN FORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION 4 All parties instituting a civil action, suit, or proceeding in a district court of the 5 United States, other than a petition for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of $405.1 6 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a party’s failure to pay the filing fee 7 only if the party is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 8 § 1915(a)(1). 9 Section 1915(a)(1) provides: 10 [A]ny court of the United States may authorize the commencement, prosecution or defense of any suit, action or 11 proceeding . . . without prepayment of fees or security therefor, 12 by a person who submits an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets such [person] possesses that the person is unable to pay 13 such fees or give security therefor. 14 15 As § 1915(a)(1) does not itself define what constitutes insufficient assets to warrant 16 IFP status, the determination of indigency falls within the district court’s discretion. See 17 Cal. Men’s Colony v. Rowland, 939 F.2d 854, 858 (9th Cir. 1991) (“Section 1915 typically 18 requires the reviewing court to exercise its sound discretion in determining whether the 19 affiant has satisfied the statute’s requirement of indigency.”), reversed on other grounds 20 by, 506 U.S. 194 (1993). “An affidavit in support of an IFP application is sufficient where 21 it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still afford the necessities of life.” 22 Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015) (citing Adkins v. E.I. Du Pont 23 de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948)). “One need not be absolutely destitute to 24 obtain benefits of the [IFP] statute.” Jefferson v. United States, 277 F.2d 723, 725 (9th Cir. 25 26 1 In addition to the $350 statutory fee, civil litigants must pay an additional administrative fee of $55. See 27 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) (Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees, District Court Misc. Fee Schedule, § 14 (eff. 28 Dec. 1, 2023)). The additional $55 administrative fee does not apply to persons granted leave to proceed 1 1960). “Nevertheless, a plaintiff seeking IFP status must allege poverty ‘with some 2 particularity, definiteness[,] and certainty.’” Escobedo, 787 F.3d at 1234 (quoting United 3 States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981)). 4 In Plaintiff’s IFP Application, Plaintiff states that her monthly income is $2,537.63 5 with take-home pay of $2,193.43. IFP App. at 1. Plaintiff also states that she receives 6 $1,715 a month in social security payments and receives CALPERS and loans from friends. 7 Id. Plaintiff also owns a 2021 Mercedez Benz GLE 53 and reports owning a “2015 8 promissory note” worth $2.592 million. Id. at 2. Plaintiff’s monthly expenses are $500 9 for housing, $60 for utilities, and $260 in loan payments. Id. Based on the information 10 provided by Plaintiff, the Court is not convinced that Plaintiff has alleged “poverty with 11 some particularity, definiteness, and certainty,” nor has Plaintiff alleged that the $405 filing 12 fee would interfere with her ability to “afford the necessities of life.” Escobedo, 787 F.3d 13 at 1234. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s IFP Application. 14 ELECTRONIC FILING MOTION 15 Generally, “[e]xcept as prescribed by local rule, order, or other procedure, the Court 16 has designated all cases to be assigned to the Electronic Filing System.” S.D. Cal. CivLR 17 5.4(a). With respect to pro se litigants, however, “[u]nless otherwise authorized by the 18 court, all documents submitted for filing to the Clerk’s Office . . . must be in legible, paper 19 form.” Office of the Clerk, United States District Court for the Southern District of 20 California, Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual, § 2(b) 21 (Sept. 24, 2025) [hereinafter “ECF Manual”].2 “A pro se party seeking leave to 22 electronically file documents must file a motion and demonstrate the means to do so 23 properly by stating their equipment and software capabilities in addition to agreeing to 24 follow all rules and policies in the CM/ECF Administrative Policies and Procedures 25 Manual.” Id. 26 27 2 Available at: 28 https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/_assets/pdf/cmecf/Electronic%20Case%20Filing%20Procedures%20Ma 1 The ECF Manual refers to the Court’s official website for CM/ECF technical 2 specifications, id. § 1(i), which include a “[c]omputer running on Windows or Macintosh”; 3 “[s]oftware to convert documents from a word processor format to portable document 4 format (PDF),” such as “Adobe Acrobat 7.0 and higher”; “[i]nternet access supporting a 5 transfer rate of 56kb or higher”; a compatible browser, such as “Firefox 3.5, and Internet 6 Explorer 6.0 and 7.0”; a “[s]canner to image non-computerized documents 400 pixels per 7 inch (ppi)”; and a PACER account. United States District Court, Southern District of 8 California, CM/ECF Information: General Information, 9 https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/cmecf.aspx (last visited Oct. 23, 2025). 10 Here, Plaintiff has provided the required particulars about her access to technology 11 conforming to the CM/ECF technical specifications noted above, and Plaintiff has agreed 12 to be bound by the rules and policies in the ECF Manual. CM/ECF Mot. at 1. Therefore, 13 Plaintiff’s CM/ECF Motion is GRANTED. 14 CONCLUSION 15 In light of the foregoing, the Court: 16 1. DENIES Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without 17 Prepaying Fees or Costs (ECF No. 2). 18 2. DISMISSES Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 1) WITHOUT PREJUDICE 19 for failure to prepay the filing fee mandated by 28 U.S.C. §1914(a). 20 3. GRANTS Plaintiff an additional thirty (30) days from the date on which this 21 Order is electronically docketed to either (1) pay the entire $405 statutory and 22 administrative filing fee, or (2) file a new IFP Application alleging that they are unable to 23 pay the requisite fee. Should Plaintiff fail to either pay the filing fee or file a new IFP 24 Motion, the Court will convert this dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint into dismissal of 25 this civil action without prejudice. 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / / 1 4. GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Electronically (ECF No. 3). 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 ||Dated: August 24, 2026 4 (een 5 on. Janis L. Sammartino United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28