Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-01983/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-01983-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:1383 Review of HHS Decision (regarding payment of benefits)

---

1

19-cv-1983-MDD

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRETT JASON LAWRENCE,

Plaintiff, 

v.

ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner of 

Social Security,

Defendant. 

Case No.: 19-cv-1983-MDD

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 

[ECF No. 3]

On October 15, 2019, Plaintiff Brett Jason Lawrence (“Plaintiff”) filed 

this social security appeal pursuant to Section 205(g) of the Social Security 

Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), challenging the denial of his application for disability 

insurance benefits and supplemental security income disability benefits.

(ECF No. 1). Plaintiff simultaneously filed a motion to proceed in forma 

pauperis (“IFP”). (ECF No. 3). For the reasons set forth herein, the Court

DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s motion to proceed IFP. 

DISCUSSION

All parties instituting any civil action, suit, or proceeding in a district 

court of the United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, 

Case 3:19-cv-01983-MDD Document 4 Filed 11/05/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2

19-cv-1983-MDD

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

must pay a filing fee of $400.1 See U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed 

despite plaintiff’s failure to prepay the entire fee only if he is granted leave to 

proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 

1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). “To proceed [IFP] is a privilege not a right.” 

Smart v. Heinze, 347 F.2d 114, 116 (9th Cir. 1965). A party need not be 

completely destitute to proceed IFP. Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & 

Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339-40 (1948). But “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 remonstrances of a suitor who is 

financially able, in whole or in part, to pull his own oar.” Temple v. 

Ellerthorpe, 586 F. Supp. 848, 850 (D.R.I. 1984). 

As such, “the facts as to [an] affiant's poverty” must be stated “‘with 

some particularity, definiteness, and certainty.’” United States v. McQuade, 

647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981) (quoting Jefferson v. United States, 277 

F.2d 723, 725 (9th Cir. 1960)). “It is important for litigants applying to 

proceed without prepaying fees and costs to accurately and honestly report 

their income, assets, and expenses[.]” Archuleta v. Arizona, No. CV 19-05466 

PHX CDB, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186262, at *1 (D. Ariz. Oct. 25, 2019). An 

applicant must "[c]omplete all questions" in his application and "not leave 

any blanks[.]" Id. 

Here, Plaintiff states he receives “food stamps” as his sole monthly 

income, but does not indicate the amount he receives in stamps. (ECF No. 3

 

1 In addition to the $350.00 statutory fee, civil litigants must pay an additional 

administrative fee of $50.00. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(b) (Judicial Conference Schedule of 

Fees, District Court Misc. Fee Schedule, § 14 (eff. June 1, 2016)). The additional $50.00 

administrative fee does not apply to persons granted leave to proceed IFP. Id.

Case 3:19-cv-01983-MDD Document 4 Filed 11/05/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3

19-cv-1983-MDD

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

at 2).

2 Plaintiff is presently unemployed and has been unemployed for at 

least the past two years. (Id.). He reports not having any bank accounts,

savings, assets, or liabilities, and does not expect that to change in the 

coming year. (ECF No. 3). Plaintiff states he has no expenses of any kind,

and no persons who rely on him for support. (Id.). Plaintiff did not provide 

any information that will help explain why he cannot pay the costs of these 

proceedings. (Id. at 5). Without further explanation, the Court cannot

determine whether Plaintiff has the ability to pay fees and costs. See Aceves 

v. United States, No. 18cv2380-LAB (KSC), 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48321, at 

*1 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 2019) (denying IFP where Plaintiff reported “0” or 

“N/A” in response to almost every question and failed to provide any 

information explaining his inability to pay the costs of the proceedings). 

Accordingly, the Court DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s 

motion to proceed IFP. On or before November 20, 2019, Plaintiff must 

either pay the requisite filing fee or file a renewed motion to proceed IFP.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: November 5, 2019

 

2 All pincite page references refer to the automatically generated ECF pagination, not the 

page number in the original document.

Case 3:19-cv-01983-MDD Document 4 Filed 11/05/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3