Opinion
CV-24-01186-PHX-DWL
07-24-2024
Judy Carrillo, Plaintiff, v. Lowe's Stores, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Dominic W. Lanza United States District Judge
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Judy Carrillo's Application for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) (Doc. 2), which the Court hereby denies.
Generally, all parties instituting a civil action in this Court must pay a filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). The Court may authorize the filing of a suit without payment of fees if the plaintiff submits an affidavit, including a statement of all his or her assets, showing that he or she is unable to pay the filing fees or costs. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). “[T]he privilege of proceeding in forma pauperis is a matter within the discretion of the trial court[.]” Weller v. Dickson, 314 F.2d 598, 600 (9th Cir. 1963).Carrillo v. Go Fund Me, 2024 WL 3299793, *1 (D. Ariz. 2024).
Plaintiff recently filed 48 cases in the District of Arizona, applying for leave to proceed in forma pauperis each time, and in a growing number of these cases, the judges have “denied Plaintiff's IFP motion, concluding that she ‘is abusing the Court's process for in forma pauperis litigants, which is intended to ensure access to the justice system for claimants who cannot afford to pay the filing fee.'” Carrillo v. Burger King, 2:24-cv-01197-GMS (June 20, 2024) (Doc. 6) (quoting Carrillo v. Only Fans, No. 2:24-cv-00758-SMM (May 29, 2024) (Doc. 5); Carrillo v. Landmark Event Center, No. 2:24-cv- 01193-SMM (May 29, 2024) (Doc. 5); Carrillo v. Anderson Lock & Safe, No. 2:24-cv-01243-SMM (May 29, 2024) (Doc. 5); Carrillo v. Go Fund Me, No. 2:24-cv-01183-DGC (June 3, 2024) (Doc. 5)).
“This court has the inherent power to restrict a litigant's ability to commence abusive litigation in forma pauperis. When the IFP privilege is misused, permission to proceed IFP can be denied.” Go Fund Me, 2024 WL 3299793, at *1 (citation omitted).
“Plaintiff shows no sign of prosecuting her cases beyond the filing of her initial complaint. Allowing her to proceed would unjustifiably strain the Court's resources.” Id. at *2.
Due to Plaintiff's abuse of the Court's IFP process, Plaintiff's IFP application will be denied. If she intends to proceed with this lawsuit, she must pay the filing fee within two weeks. If the filing fee is not paid within two weeks, this case will be terminated.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's IFP application (Doc. 2) is denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff intends to proceed with this action, she must pay the filing fee within two weeks of the date of this order . Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to adhere to this order will result in dismissal of this action.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff fails to pay the filing fee within two weeks, the Clerk of Court shall terminate this case without further notice.