Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lahman v. Colvin

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

October 10, 2013

MONICA LAHMAN, o/b/o Bill Lahman deceased, Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION DENYING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

KAREN L. STROMBOM, Magistrate Judge.

This case has been referred to Magistrate Judge Karen L. Strombom pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule MJR 3 and 4. This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff's filing of an application to proceed in forma pauperis and a complaint to review and set aside a decision of the Social Security Administration under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Because plaintiff's application indicates she has sufficient income with which to pay the $400.00 filing fee, the undersigned recommends that the court deny the application.

DISCUSSION

The district court may permit indigent litigants to proceed in forma pauperis upon completion of a proper affidavit of indigency. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). However, the Court has broad discretion in denying an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Weller v. Dickson , 314 F.2d 598 (9th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 375 U.S. 845 (1963). By requesting the court to proceed in forma pauperis, plaintiff is asking the government to incur the filing fee because she allegedly is unable to afford the costs necessary to proceed with her cause of action.

In her application, plaintiff states she is presently employed and has a net monthly salary of $4, 000. See ECF #1, p. 1. Plaintiff also states she has $1, 000 in her checking account and another $2, 000 in her savings account. See id. at p. 2. Because it appears plaintiff has sufficient funds with which to pay the Court filing fee - particularly given that there are no other persons who are dependent upon her for support - it is not unreasonable to expect her to pay the required Court filing fee.

CONCLUSION

Because it is reasonable for plaintiff to incur the costs to proceed with this cause of action, the undersigned recommends that the Court deny her application to proceed in forma pauperis. Accordingly, the undersigned also recommends that the Court order plaintiff to pay the required filing fee within thirty (30) days of the Court's order.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedures ("Fed. R. Civ. P.") 72(b), the parties shall have fourteen (14) days from service of this Report and Recommendation to file written objections thereto. See also Fed.R.Civ.P. 6. Failure to file objections will result in a waiver of those objections for purposes of appeal. Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Accommodating the time limit imposed by Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), the Clerk is directed set this matter for consideration on November 1, 2013, as noted in the caption.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.