Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04751/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04751-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 720
Nature of Suit: Labor Management Relations Act
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

E.K. Wade,

Plaintiff,

vs.

American Federation of Government Employees,

Defendant. /

No. C 06-4751 MEJ

ORDER DENYING APPLICATION TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

I. INTRODUCTION

Before this Court is Plaintiff’s Application to proceed In Forma Pauperis filed on August 7,

2006. Having reviewed the plaintiff’s papers, the statutory and case law authority, the Court

HEREBY DENIES Plaintiff’s application to proceed In Forma Pauperis.

II. BACKGROUND

On August 7, 2006, Plaintiff E.K. Wade (hereinafter Wade) filed a complaint against

Defendant American Federation of Government Employees (hereinafter AFGE) for Breach of Duty

of Fair Representation.” (Compl. at 1.) In addition, Wade has filed a consent to assignment, an

application to proceed In Forma Pauperis, and a responses to interrogatories.

The complaint alleges that AFGE offered to assist Wade in his “appeals to the Merit System

Protection Board” against the U.S. Department of Labor “DOL”. (Compl. at 2.) Wade claims AFGE

breached their duty of fair representation when they refused to assist Wade in his appeals against the

Case 3:06-cv-04751-MEJ Document 10 Filed 12/12/06 Page 1 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 2

DOL. Wade seeks damages resulting from AFGE’s breach.

III. DISCUSSION

A. LEGAL STANDARD

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) a person submitting the application to proceed In Forma

Pauperis must include a statement of all assets demonstrating the person is unable to pay the court

costs and fees.

Under Civil Local Rule 3-10 (b) of the Northern District of California the application must

contain: (1) a request to proceed In Forma Pauperis, (2) an affidavit or declaration providing the

information required under Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915, and (3) a proposed order.

B. INDIGENCY REQUIREMENT

Civil Local Rule 3-10 (b) requires a declaration demonstrating financial need in accordance

with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). When considering a motion filed pursuant to § 1915(a), "[t]he only

determination to be made by the court ... is whether the statements in the affidavit satisfy the

requirement of poverty." Watson v. Ault, 525 F.2d 886, 891 (11th Cir. 1976). The court requires a

statement demonstrating financial need in order to justify waiving the court fees. Here, the affidavit

accompanying the application to proceed In Forma Pauperis did not contain all necessary financial

information. The Court subsequently required Wade to submit a more particularized financial

statement. On September 25, 2006, Wade submitted answers to the Court’s interrogatories

regarding his financial status.

The policy for allowing plaintiffs to proceed In Forma Pauperis is to protect litigants from

abandoning “what may be a meritorious claim in order to spare himself complete destitution.” 

Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 340 (1948). The Supreme Court has held

“an affidavit [to proceed In Forma Pauperis] is sufficient which states that one cannot because of

his poverty pay or give security for the costs and still be able to provide himself and dependents’

with the necessities of life.” Id., at 339. The Courts filing fee for a civil case is $350. Wade’s

income totals approximately $30,400 a year or $2,500 a month. Wade’s expenses for rent, food,

Case 3:06-cv-04751-MEJ Document 10 Filed 12/12/06 Page 2 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 3

utilities and clothing total approximately $1,645 a month. (Application to proceed In Forma

Pauperis at 1.) Wade’s monthly debt payments total approximately $200 a month. The income

minus necessities expenses and debt payments leaves a balance of approximately $655 a month. 

This amount is sufficient to require Wade to pay the court fees involved in litigation. The other

monthly expenses listed by Wade are not considered by this court as necessities of life for

consideration in an In Forma Pauperis application. Therefore, Wade’s income is sufficient to

require him to pay the court costs and fees without depriving Wade of the ability to pay for his

necessities of his life.

Prior cases have used the poverty level set by the United States Department of Health and

Human Services as an additional measure in determining whether plaintiff’s poverty to proceed In

Forma Pauperis. See Martinez v. Kristi Kleaners, Inc., 364 F.3d 1305 (11th Cir. 2004). According

to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the poverty level for 2006 for a single person

with no dependants is $9,800 or $816.67 a month. Annual Update of the HHS Poverty Guidelines,

71 Fed. Reg. 3848 (U.S. Dep’t of Health and Human Services 2006). Based on the financial

statements, Wade’s monthly income is approximately $2533.35 or $30,400.20 a year. (Answer to

Interrogatories at 1-2.) Wade’s income is well above the poverty line established by the U.S. Dep’t

of Health and Human Services. Therefore, Wade’s income is sufficiently above the poverty line that

without hardship he can pay the court costs and fees while still able to pay the necessities of his life.

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, Wade’s Application to proceed In Forma Pauperis is HEREBY DENIED

pursuant to U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Plaintiff shall pay in full all required filing fees. If Plaintiff pays the

required filling fees, the clerk shall issue a summons. If Plaintiff fails to pay the required filling fees

in full, this action shall be dismissed without further notice to the Plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

1915 (e)(2)(A).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Case 3:06-cv-04751-MEJ Document 10 Filed 12/12/06 Page 3 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 4

Dated: December 12, 2006 

MARIA-ELENA JAMES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-04751-MEJ Document 10 Filed 12/12/06 Page 4 of 4