Loera v. Kijakazi
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Karen S. Crawford (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed Plaintiff Ricardo L.'s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis in a Social Security action. The court granted the application, finding that the plaintiff's declaration demonstrated an inability to pay the filing fee without hardship.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis granted“Plaintiff's Application is therefore GRANTED.” | agree with court The court correctly applied the statutory standard of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) and the Ninth Circuit precedent requiring a showing of poverty with particularity. The record recited in the order (a declaration showing essentially no income or assets beyond public assistance) satisfies the requirement that the plaintiff cannot pay the fee and still provide necessities of life, as established in Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. The decision follows logically from the cited law and the stated facts. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally correct and cites the appropriate binding authorities for the standard of review. It explicitly connects the facts of the plaintiff's declaration (no income/assets beyond public assistance) to the legal standard (hardship/necessities of life). There are no gaps in the reasoning for this specific, narrow motion.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICARDO L., Case No.: 23-cv-2030-KSC 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION 13 v. TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS [DOC. NO. 3] 14 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff filed an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Doc. No. 3. A court may 18 authorize the commencement of a suit without prepayment of fees if the plaintiff submits 19 an affidavit, including a statement of plaintiff’s assets, showing plaintiff is unable to pay 20 the filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The affidavit must “state the facts as to [the] 21 affiant's poverty with some particularity, definiteness and certainty.” United States v. 22 McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir.1981) (internal quotations omitted). 23 A party need not be completely destitute to proceed in forma pauperis. Adkins v. 24 E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339–340 (1948). An affidavit is sufficient 25 if it shows that the applicant cannot pay the fee “and still be able to provide himself [or 26 herself] and dependents with the necessities of life.” Id. (internal quotations omitted). 27 28 1 Here, plaintiff's application is supported by a declaration showing essentially no 2 ||income or assets beyond public assistance sufficient to provide food. The Court finds 3 ||paying the filing fee would impose a hardship on plaintiff. Plaintiff's Application is 4 || therefore GRANTED. 5 || Dated: November 3, 2023 li. 6 Ms Lie a 7 Hon. Karen S. Crawford United States Magistrate Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28