Opinion
22-cv-00156-LAB-RBB
03-16-2022
MARIA HERTA, Plaintiff, v. TERRIE E. ROBERTS, Defendant.
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS WITHOUT PREJUDICE [DKT. 2]
Hon. Larry Alan Burns United States District Judge
Plaintiff Maria Herta filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. Dkt. 2. Because the Motion gives an incomplete picture of Herta's finances, it is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) must establish that the litigant “cannot because of [her] poverty pay or give security for costs . . . and still be able to provide [her]self and dependents with the necessities of life.” Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339-40 (1948). Courts have discretion to grant or deny such applications. Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015). In this District, the Local Rules set forth specific requirements regarding the contents of an IFP motion. See CivLR 3.2.
The District Court's website provides a form that would conform with the Local Rules (if fully and accurately completed). It can be found at https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/ assets/pdf/forms/Motion%20to%20Proceed%20In%20Forma%20Pauperis.pdf
The Motion doesn't give the Court enough information to determine whether requiring Herta to pay filing fees would make her unable to provide for herself and her dependent. She acknowledges she is self-employed and has a monthly income, but she doesn't list any income, aside from $1,600 in monthly child support. She acknowledges she has expenses, but she doesn't identify her average monthly expenses. She doesn't state the date of her last employment or the amount of her monthly pay from that employment. CivLR 3.2(a)(2). Without each of these pieces of information, she can't carry her burden to demonstrate that she is unable to pay the filing fee.
The Motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. On or before April 29, 2022, Herta must either (1) pay the entire $400 statutory and administrative filing fee, or (2) file a new IFP motion resolving the issues the Court identified. If Herta does neither, her complaint will be dismissed without prejudice and this case will be closed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.