Gonzalez v. Kijakazi
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- William v. Gallo (author)
Analysis
Plaintiff Danny Gonzalez filed a renewed motion to proceed in forma pauperis in a Social Security appeal after his initial motion was denied. The Court granted the motion, finding that Plaintiff's financial representations demonstrated an inability to pay the filing fee.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Plaintiff's Renewed Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is granted.“Having reviewed Plaintiff’s submission, the Court GRANTS the IFP motion and incorporates its prior ruling in its October 26, 2022 Order finding the Complaint satisfies the minimal pleading standards for social security appeals.” | agree with court The court correctly applied the statutory standard for in forma pauperis status. The plaintiff demonstrated that his income ($350/month) is significantly lower than his expenses ($1,100/month) and that his only asset is a vehicle valued at $5,000. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, a litigant is entitled to IFP status if they cannot afford the filing fee. The court's reliance on the prior order for the sufficiency of the complaint is appropriate as the IFP motion itself does not require a full merits review, only a screening for frivolousness or failure to state a claim, which was previously addressed. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally correct and cites the appropriate statutes and case law for the specific motion before it. It correctly notes that the sufficiency of the complaint was already addressed in a prior order, avoiding redundancy. The financial facts provided by the plaintiff clearly support the grant of IFP status.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANNY GONZALEZ, Case No.: 22-CV-1555-WVG 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 13 v. MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 14 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 15 Defendant. 16 17 18 19 Danny Gonzalez (“Plaintiff”) again files for leave to proceed in forma pauperis 20 (“Renewed IFP Motion”) on the Complaint following the Court’s denial of Plaintiff’s 21 initial IFP Motion. (Doc. No. 7.) The Court reviews Plaintiff’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. 22 section 1915(e), as required when a litigant files a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. 23 Having reviewed Plaintiff’s submission, the Court GRANTS the IFP motion and 24 incorporates its prior ruling in its October 26, 2022 Order finding the Complaint satisfies 25 the minimal pleading standards for social security appeals. (See Doc. No. 6, 3:3-16.) 26 Plaintiff’s Renewed IFP Motion affirms that Plaintiff’s only source of income is $350.00 27 per month in food stamps, and his monthly expenses total $1,100.00. He adds that his only 28 asset is a 2012 Dodge Challenger SXT valued at $5,000.00 and has not worked since 1 || January 22, 2021. (Doc. No. 7, 2.) Collectively, these representations demonstrate Plaintiff 2 ||1is unable to pay the filing fee and thus satisfy the burden Plaintiff bears under 28 U.S.C. 3 || section 1915.28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 || DATED: November 18, 2022 6 A Ss 7 Hon. William V. Gallo g United States Magistrate Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28