Opinion
1:21-cv-00898-SKO (PC)
06-08-2021
ERICK EDDIE RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff, v. M. CATE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS SHOULD NOT BE DENIED 21-DAY DEADLINE
SHEILA K. OBERTO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Erick Eddie Rodriguez initiated this action on September 10, 2019. (Doc. 1.) On that same date, Plaintiff filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). (Doc. 2.) On June 4, 2021, Magistrate Judge Allison Claire issued an order transferring this case to the Fresno Division of the Eastern District of California. (Doc. 15.) The Court has not yet ruled on Plaintiff's motion to proceed IFP.
According to the certified account statement submitted by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Plaintiff had $842.91 on the date he filed his application to proceed IFP. (Doc. 6) This is more than enough to pay the $402 filing fee in this action. Therefore, Plaintiff must show why he is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis.
Proceeding “in forma pauperis is a privilege not a right.” Smart v. Heinze, 347 F.2d 114, 116 (9th Cir. 1965). While a party need not be completely destitute to proceed in forma pauperis, Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339-40 (1948), “‘the same even-handed care must be employed to assure that federal funds are not squandered to underwrite, at public expense, either frivolous claims or the remonstrances of a suitor who is financially able, in whole or in material part, to pull his own oar, '” Doe v. Educ. Enrichment Sys., No. 15-cv-2628-MMA-MDD, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173063, *2 (S.D. Cal. 2015) (citation omitted). Hence, “the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that the [plaintiff's] allegation of poverty is untrue.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(A).
Plaintiff appears to have had adequate funds to pay the filing fee for this action when he filed his application to proceed in forma pauperis. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff, within 21 days of the date of service of this order, to show cause in writing why his motion to proceed IFP should not be denied. Failure to respond to this order may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to obey a court order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.