Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01447/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01447-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans w/ Disabilities Act (ADA)

---

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

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL ANTHONY PASTOR,

Plaintiff,

v.

WOODMONT RES,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-01447-KAW 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 

RECONSIDERATION OF DENIAL OF 

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN 

FORMA PAUPERIS; ORDER 

PERMITTING PLAINTIFF TO SUBMIT 

AN AMENDED IFP APPLICATION

Re: Dkt. No. 5

On April 8, 2015, the Court denied Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis

(IFP), because he represented that he received a combined $1,238.00 per week in state worker’s 

compensation and disability insurance payments. (See IFP Application, Dkt. No. 2 at 2) Thus, the 

Court ordered that Plaintiff pay the filing fee on or before April 27, 2015. (Dkt. No. 4.)

On April 27, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the denial of his IFP 

application. (Pl.’s Mot., Dkt. No. 5.) Therein, Plaintiff stated that his annual income is less than 

$25,000, that he provides for a teenage daughter, and that, since October 2014, his “income has 

been $536.00 per week from State Disability Insurance alone.” Id. at 1. 

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-9(a), Plaintiff was required to obtain leave of court to file 

the motion for reconsideration. Plaintiff did not obtain leave, so his motion for reconsideration is 

DENIED. 

Notwithstanding, Plaintiff is hereby given permission to file an amended IFP application 

that includes his entire financial picture, including all income received from all sources, on or 

before May 29, 2015. Also, in response to question 4b, Plaintiff should list all individuals who 

depend on him for support and how much he contributes to their support, including his teenage 

daughter. If Plaintiff does not contribute to his daughter’s financial support, she should not be 

Case 3:15-cv-01447-JD Document 6 Filed 05/07/15 Page 1 of 2
2

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

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

listed.

Plaintiff is advised that if his benefits are similar to that in his original application—which 

amounted to almost $5,000 per month— his application will again be denied, because he has the 

means to pay the filing fee. 

Failure to file an amended IFP application by May 29, 2015, or pay the $400.00 filing fee, 

may result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 7, 2015

__________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:15-cv-01447-JD Document 6 Filed 05/07/15 Page 2 of 2