Honorable v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Full title: JAMES HONORABLE, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Apr 16, 2019

Case No. 18-cv-10502 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 16, 2019)

Opinion

Case No. 18-cv-10502

04-16-2019

JAMES HONORABLE, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

Hon. Matthew F. Leitman

ORDER (1) SUSTAINING OBJECTIONS (ECF #7) TO REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF #6) AND (2) GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS (ECF #5)

In this action, Plaintiff James Honorable seeks Social Security Disability Insurance Benefits. (See Compl., ECF #1.) On February 12, 2018, Honorable filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis and without prepayment of the filing fee (the "Initial IFP Application"). (See Initial IFP Application, ECF #2.) In the Initial IFP Application, Honorable claimed that he was not earning any wages and did not have any assets. (See id.)

On February 13, 2018, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued an order to show cause because she found that the Initial IFP Application was "incomplete" and did not provide "a sufficient basis to determine whether or not [Honorable] can proceed without prepayment of the filing fee." (Show Cause Order, ECF #4 at Pg. ID 8-9.) Honorable responded to the show cause order on the same day that it was issued by filing an amended application to proceed in forma pauperis that reflected his current wages and assets (the "Amended IFP Application"). (See Amended IFP Application, ECF #5.) The Magistrate Judge thereafter issued a report and recommendation in which she recommended that the Court deny the Amended IFP Application due, in part, to the discrepancies between the two applications (the "R&R"). (See R&R, ECF #6.)

Honorable filed timely objections to the R&R (the "Objections"). (See Objections, ECF #7.) Honorable's counsel explained in the Objections that the submission of the Initial IFP Application was a clerical error and that as soon as counsel realized that mistake, counsel immediately filed the Amended IFP Application. (See id.) The Court accepts the representations of Honorable's counsel. It therefore SUSTAINS the Objections (ECF #7) and GRANTS the Amended IFP Application (ECF #5). Honorable may proceed in forma pauperis and without prepayment of the filing fee in this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Matthew F. Leitman

MATTHEW F. LEITMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: April 16, 2019

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on April 16, 2019, by electronic means and/or ordinary mail.

s/Holly A. Monda

Case Manager

(810) 341-9764