From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Peter v. Wojcicki

United States District Court, District of South Dakota
Jan 4, 2022
3:21-CV-03023-RAL (D.S.D. Jan. 4, 2022)

Opinion

3:21-CV-03023-RAL

01-04-2022

MARIA PETER; MICHAEL PETER; JULIKA BERGER; JAROLIN BERGER, Petitioner, v. SUSAN DIANE WOJCICKI, CEO ONLINE VIDEO PLATFORM YT; WILLIAM HENRY CATES, PRESIDENT BMGF; STEPHANE BANCEL, CEO MODE-RNA THERAPUEITCS INC.; ALBERT BOURLA, CEO PFIZER INC., Respondents.


ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND REQUIRING THE FULL FILING FEE

ROBERTO A. LANGE CHIEF JUDGE

Plaintiffs Maria Peter and Michael Peter, citizens of Austria, and Julika Berger and Jarolin Berger, citizens of Germany, filed a lawsuit against defendants under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Doc. 1. Plaintiffs move for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and have included a financial affidavit. Doc. 5.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is signed by Maria Peter and includes her information and that of her spouse. See Doc. 5 at 1-5. The motion appears to have been mailed by Julika Berger. Id. at 7. Although financial information for all plaintiffs is not included, this Court finds that there is sufficient information included as to Maria Peter's finances to evaluate plaintiffs' motion.

A federal court may authorize the commencement of any lawsuit without prepayment of fees when an applicant submits an affidavit stating he or she is unable to pay the costs of the lawsuit. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). "[I]n forma pauperis status does not require a litigant to demonstrate absolute destitution." Lee v. McDonald's Corp., 231 F.3d 456, 459 (8th Cir. 2000). But in forma pauperis status is a privilege, not a right. Williams v. McKenzie, 834 F.2d 152, 154 (8th Cir. 1987). Determining whether an applicant is sufficiently impoverished to qualify to proceed in forma pauperis under § 1915 is committed to the sound discretion of the district court. Cross v. Gen. Motors Corp., 721 F.2d 1152, 1157 (8th Cir. 1983). After review of Maria Peter's financial affidavit, the Court finds that she does have sufficient funds to pay the filing fee. Thus, Maria Peter's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. Maria Peter's must pay the $402 filing fee by February 3, 2022. Failure to pay the filing fee by February 3, 2022, will result in dismissal without prejudice of Maria Peter's complaint.

Therefore, it is hereby

ORDERED that Maria Peter's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, Doc. 5, is denied. Maria Peter must pay the $402 filing fee by February 3, 2022, made payable to the Clerk, U.S. District Court. If Maria Peter does not pay the filing fee by February 3, 2022, her complaint will be dismissed without prejudice. It is further

ORDERED that, unless the remaining plaintiffs/petitioners file motions to proceed in forma pauperis with the appropriate financial affidavits or alternatively pay the filing fee by February 3, 2022, their claims will be dismissed without prejudice as well.


Summaries of

Peter v. Wojcicki

United States District Court, District of South Dakota
Jan 4, 2022
3:21-CV-03023-RAL (D.S.D. Jan. 4, 2022)
Case details for

Peter v. Wojcicki

Case Details

Full title:MARIA PETER; MICHAEL PETER; JULIKA BERGER; JAROLIN BERGER, Petitioner, v…

Court:United States District Court, District of South Dakota

Date published: Jan 4, 2022

Citations

3:21-CV-03023-RAL (D.S.D. Jan. 4, 2022)