Opinion
Case No. C19-828 JCC
07-18-2019
MARATHON FUNDING SERVICES INC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. LOUIS J. BERG, et al., Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter comes before the Court upon Plaintiffs Robert Crawford and Peter Yagi's applications to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") in the above-entitled action. (Dkt. ## 8, 9.) Plaintiff Robert Crawford, proceeding pro se, filed a proposed complaint and an IFP application on May 29, 2019. (Dkt. # 1.) On May 31, 2019, the Clerk sent Mr. Crawford a letter notifying him of multiple deficiencies with his IFP application. (Dkt. # 2.) Specifically, the Clerk advised that his application was incomplete because he did not answer all the questions on the application. (Id.) The Clerk also noted that pursuant to LCR 3(c)(3), each Plaintiff must file an IFP application, and only Mr. Crawford submitted an application in this matter. (Id.). The Clerk further noted that only Mr. Crawford signed the complaint. (Id.) The Clerk advised Plaintiff that if he did not correct these deficiencies by July 1, 2019, this action may be subject to dismissal. (Id.)
On July 1, 2019, attorney Jonathan Grindell appeared in this matter. Although he properly signed and filed a proposed complaint, thereby curing the complaint's deficiency, he failed to submit an amended IFP application on behalf of Mr. Crawford, submit IFP applications for the other Plaintiffs in this matter, or pay the filing fee. (Dkt. # 6.) The Court ordered Plaintiffs to show cause as to why this matter should not be dismissed for failure to correct the IFP deficiencies or pay the requisite filing fee. (Dkt. # 7.) On July 15, 2019, Plaintiffs Crawford and Yagi filed corrected IFP motions. (Dkt. ## 8, 9.)
With regard to Mr. Crawford, his corrected IFP application is still deficient as he did not answer all the questions. (Dkt. # 9 at 1.) Further, the IFP application indicates he has sufficient funds to afford the filing fee, as he stated that within the past twelve months he has received $58,100 in income from rent, interest, or dividends. (Id.) With regard to Mr. Yagi, it also appears he has sufficient funds to afford the filing fee as his IFP application indicates he has investment property valued at approximately $900,000. (Dkt. # 8 at 2.)
Because Mr. Crawford has not cured the IFP deficiency, and because it appears both Mr. Crawford and Mr. Yagi have sufficient funds to afford the requisite filing fee, the Court recommends both IFP applications be denied (dkt. ## 8, 9) and that Plaintiffs submit the filing fee within thirty (30) days of the District Judge's ruling on this report and recommendation.
Objections to this Report and Recommendation, if any, should be filed with the Clerk and served upon all parties to this suit by no later than fourteen (14) days after the filing of this Report and Recommendation. Objections, and any response, shall not exceed three pages. Failure to file objections within the specified time may affect your right to appeal. Objections should be noted for consideration on the District Judge's motion calendar fourteen (14) days after they are served and filed. Responses to objections, if any, shall be filed no later than fourteen (14) days after service and filing of objections. If no timely objections are filed, the matter will be ready for consideration by the District Judge on the date that objections were due.
Dated this 18th day of July, 2019.
/s/_________
MICHELLE L. PETERSON
United States Magistrate Judge