Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01530/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01530-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)

---

1

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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

On March 8, 2016, this Court denied Plaintiff’s appeal from the administrative decision of the 

Commissioner of Social Security.1 On that same day, the Clerk of the Court entered judgment in favor 

of Defendant Carolyn W. Colvin and closed the case. Thereafter, on May 8, 2016, Plaintiff filed a

notice of appeal and, on May 9, 2016, an amended motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on 

appeal. (Docs. 20, 22).2

On June 20, 2016, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals conducted an initial review of Plaintiff’s 

appeal and issued an order directing Plaintiff to either: (1) “file a motion with the [Ninth Circuit] to 

proceed in forma pauperis; (2) pay $505 to the district court as the docketing and filing fees for this 

 

1

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), the parties have consented to United States Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. 

(Docs. 6, 9). 

2

Plaintiff initially paid the filing fee and therefore she was not previously granted in forma pauperis status during 

the pendency of the action in the district court.

TERESA MARIE BERKBILE,

 Plaintiff,

v.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner of 

Social Security, 

Defendant.

/

CASE NO. 1:14-cv-1530-BAM

ORDER DENYING IN FORMA PAUPERIS 

APPLICATION AS MOOT

(Doc. 22).

Case 1:14-cv-01530-BAM Document 27 Filed 07/07/16 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

appeal and provide proof of payment to the [Ninth Circuit]; or (3) otherwise show cause why the 

appeal should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.” (Doc. 25). 

Pursuant to the order of the Ninth Circuit, Plaintiff is required to file her IFP application in her 

Ninth Circuit appeal. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP in this Court is DENIED as 

MOOT. Plaintiff is instructed to comply with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Order directing 

Plaintiff to pursue IFP status in that Court. 

For the above reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is DENIED as MOOT; 

2. Plaintiff SHALL comply with the Ninth Circuit Order as instructed on June 20, 2016. See 

(Doc. 25).

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on Plaintiff and on the Ninth 

Circuit Court of Appeals.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 6, 2016 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01530-BAM Document 27 Filed 07/07/16 Page 2 of 2