Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 Case No.: 26-cv-01686-DMS-JLB 9 JESSIE G. CROTEAU, 10 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 11 v. MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATE OF DELAWARE et al., 12 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 17 On March 17, 2026, Plaintiff Jessie G. Croteau, proceeding pro se, filed this action 18 against Defendants the State of Delaware, the Delaware Department of Insurance, the 19 Delaware Insurance Commissioner, Diane J. Bartels, James J. Black, III, and Does 1–20. 20 (Compl., ECF No. 1 at 1). Plaintiff asserts eighteen causes of action arising from the 21 liquidation of United Contractors Insurance Company, Inc. in the Delaware Court of 22 Chancery. (Id. at 2, 4, 24–45). Plaintiff concurrently filed a Motion for a Temporary 23 Restraining Order (“TRO Motion”) and a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP 24 Motion”). (TRO Mot., ECF No. 2; IFP Mot., ECF No. 3). For the following reasons, the 25 26 27 28 1 Court denies Plaintiff’s IFP Motion and dismisses the action without prejudice. 2 I. MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 3 Parties instituting a civil action in a United States district court must pay a filing fee 4 of $405. 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a)–(b).2 However, a court may authorize a party to proceed in 5 forma pauperis (“IFP”) without the prepayment of fees if the party submits an affidavit 6 demonstrating their inability to pay. § 1915(a)(1); see CivLR 3.2(a) (listing specific 7 requirements for the affidavit). Although a party need not be “absolutely destitute” to 8 proceed IFP, they must “allege poverty with some particularity, definiteness and certainty” 9 such that they could not “pay the court costs and still afford the necessities of life.” 10 Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015) (citation modified). 11 Plaintiff’s IFP Motion consists of an Application to Proceed in District Court 12 Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Form AO 239). (IFP Mot. 1). Plaintiff reports that he 13 is out of work and self-employed, making around $2,000 per month. (Id.). Plaintiff alleges 14 that his spouse makes around $5,150 per month. (Id.). Plaintiff states that he has $696 in 15 a bank account, a home worth $1.2 million, a 2005 Chevy Avalanche, and no other assets. 16 (Id. at 3). Plaintiff states that he has two daughters who rely on him and his spouse for 17 support. (Id.). Plaintiff itemizes monthly expenses totaling $6,402. (Id. at 4). Plaintiff’s 18 own figures demonstrate that his and his spouse’s monthly income exceeds their monthly 19 expenses by approximately $750, nearly twice the $405 filing fee. (Id. at 1, 4). Plaintiff’s 20 later-filed declaration describes a back injury and unexpected family expenses but does not 21 provide any updated figures. (ECF No. 6 at 2–3). On this record, Plaintiff has not alleged 22 poverty with the requisite “particularity, definiteness and certainty” to show he “cannot 23 24 25 1 As the Complaint is dismissed, Plaintiff’s TRO Motion is DENIED AS MOOT. (ECF No. 2); see, e.g., Abera v. S.D. Pacificvu LLC, No. 3:25-cv-01437-RBM-DEB, 2025 WL 1645593, at *2 (S.D. Cal. June 26 10, 2025). 2 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 || pay the court costs and still afford the necessities of life.” Escobedo, 787 F.3d at 1234. 2 || Accordingly, Plaintiff's JFP Motion is denied.* 3 Il. CONCLUSION AND ORDER 4 For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs Motion to Proceed Jn Forma Pauperis 1s 5 DENIED. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. Within thirty (30) 6 ||days of the issuance of this Order, Plaintiff may file a renewed motion with additional 7 ||information about his economic status or pay the $405 filing fee. If Plaintiff does neither, 8 || the Clerk of Court is instructed to close this case. 9 IT ISSO ORDERED. 10 |} Dated: August 24, 2026 11 2 ins Yn. 12 Hon. Dana M. Sabraw B United States District Judge 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 95 Plaintiff alternatively requests leave to pay the filing fee in monthly installments of $50 under § 1915(b)(1). (ECF No. 6 at 1, 4). However, that provision is “‘a carve-out for prisoners” that does not 26 || confer a right to installment payments on a non-prisoner. Hymas v. U.S. Dep’t of the Interior, 73 F.4th 763, 767-68 (9th Cir. 2023). Although a court retains discretion under § 1915(a)(1) to set a partial filing 27 fee, the current record does not demonstrate that Plaintiff cannot pay the full fee and still afford the 28 necessities of life. /d.; Escobedo, 787 F.3d at 1234. Additionally, as the Court has now ruled on □□□□□□□□□□□ IFP Motion, his Motion to Expedite is DENIED AS MOOT. YQ