From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barnes v. Kent Courthouse

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Dec 3, 2021
2:21-cv-01445-MJP (W.D. Wash. Dec. 3, 2021)

Opinion

2:21-cv-01445-MJP

12-03-2021

DARENE BARNES, Plaintiff, v. KENT COURTHOUSE, STEVE LOVEKIN, ROLANDA CREDIT, Defendants.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On October 22, 2021, Plaintiff Darene Barnes filed a Declaration and Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”). Dkt. 1. The Court determined that Plaintiff's IFP Application was deficient as she had failed to properly complete portions of her IFP application. Plaintiff was directed to cure these deficiencies by filing a completed IFP application by November 29, 2021. Dkt. 3. Plaintiff failed to respond.

DISCUSSION

As a general rule, all parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a United States District Court must pay a filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). The Court may authorize the commencement of an action “without prepayment of fees and costs of security therefor, by a person who submits an affidavit that ... the person is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Therefore, an action may proceed despite a failure to prepay the filing fee only if leave to proceed IFP is granted by the Court. See Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1178, 1177 (9th Cir.1999).

The Ninth Circuit has held “permission to proceed in forma pauperis is itself a matter of privilege and not a right; denial of an informa pauperis status does not violate the applicant's right to due process.” Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1231 (9th Cir.1984) (citing Weller v. Dickson, 314 F.2d 598, 600 (9th Cir.1963)). In addition, the Court has broad discretion to grant or deny a motion to proceed IFP. O'Loughlin v. Doe, 920 F.2d 614, 616 (9th Cir.1990); Weller, 314 F.2d at 600-601.

CONCLUSION

By filing a request to proceed IFP, Plaintiff is asking the government to incur the filing fee because she allegedly is unable to afford the costs necessary to proceed with her complaint. However, Plaintiff's IFP application is incomplete and although she was given an opportunity to provide additional information in support, she has failed to respond. Accordingly, the undersigned recommends that the Court deny her IFP application (Dkt. 1) and that Plaintiff be directed to pay the filing fee. A proposed order is attached.

Objections, if any, to this Report and Recommendation must be filed no later than December 27, 2021, and the clerk shall note the matter ready for the Court's consideration on December 29, 2021. Objections shall not exceed five (5) pages. The failure to timely object may affect the right to appeal. The Clerk shall send a copy of this Order to Plaintiff.


Summaries of

Barnes v. Kent Courthouse

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Dec 3, 2021
2:21-cv-01445-MJP (W.D. Wash. Dec. 3, 2021)
Case details for

Barnes v. Kent Courthouse

Case Details

Full title:DARENE BARNES, Plaintiff, v. KENT COURTHOUSE, STEVE LOVEKIN, ROLANDA…

Court:United States District Court, Western District of Washington

Date published: Dec 3, 2021

Citations

2:21-cv-01445-MJP (W.D. Wash. Dec. 3, 2021)