Opinion
Case No.: 4:14-cv-03152-CW
08-05-2014
N. CHARLES PODARAS, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF MENLO PARK, et al., Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO DENY APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS WITHOUT PREJUDICE
On July 11, 2014, Plaintiff N. Charles Podaras, who proceeds pro se in this action, filed a complaint against the City of Menlo Park, the Office of the Clerk of the Superior Court of San Mateo County, Claudio Ruiz, Susie Eldred, Jorge Melendez, and Janice Antonini. (Compl., Dkt. No. 1.) Plaintiff also filed an application to proceed in in forma pauperis. For the reasons stated below, the undersigned recommends that Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis be denied without prejudice.
In his application to proceed in forma pauperis, Plaintiff indicates that he is not currently employed. (IFP Application at 1, Dkt. No. 2.) Plaintiff also states that in the past 12 months, he has only received income in the form of government assistance, including food stamps, which he "exhausted (2014 March), now hopefully in recertification." (Id. at 2.) He was receiving approximately $200.00 per month. (Id.)
Notwithstanding this modest reported income and reported assets of about $100.00, Plaintiff seems to be able to service significant credit card debt. (Id. at 3.) He pays his American Express account "in full." (Id.) At the time of his application, the balance on the account was $1,600.00. He also pays approximately $200.00 per month towards his Mastercard, which has a balance of about $8,320.00, and approximately $225.00 per month towards his Visa, which has a balance of about $11,000.00. (Id.) Given Plaintiff's ability to service this substantial credit card debt, it is not clear that he meets the financial eligibility criteria for in forma pauperis status. Therefore, the undersigned recommends that Plaintiff's current application to proceed in forma pauperis be denied without prejudice.
The undersigned further recommends that if Plaintiff wishes to proceed in this action in forma pauperis, he should submit a subsequent application that is completed in full and accompanied by a declaration that explains his ability to service his credit card debt despite his modest income and assets. Plaintiff should either (1) pay the filing fee or (2) file a subsequent application that is completed in full, along with a declaration, within 30 days of the District Court's order on this report and recommendation.
Any party may file objections to this report and recommendation with the district judge within 14 days of being served with a copy. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); N.D. Civil L.R. 72-2. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. IBEW Local 595 Trust Funds v. ACS Controls Corp., No. C-10-5568 EDL, 2011 WL 1496056, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 20, 2011).
IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 5, 2014
/s/__________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge