Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00380/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00380-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act

---

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEBRA NAGAST,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 13cv0380-GPC-JMA

ORDER 

(1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO PROCEED IFP 

(2) SETTING BRIEFING

SCHEDULE

[Dkt. Nos. 10, 14]

vs.

METROPOLITAN TRANSIT

SYSTEM; SG.T EDWARDS; SGT.

ZAMORA; OFC. ALAMILLO; and

DOES 1-10,

Defendants.

On January 15, 2013, Plaintiff Kebra Nagast (“Plaintiff”) filed a civil action in

the Superior Court of San Diego. On February 15, 2013, Defendants San Diego

Metropolitan Transit System, Code Compliance Inspector Alamillo, and Code

Compliance Inspector Edwards (“Defendants”) filed a notice of removal to this Court.

(Dkt. No. 1.) On June 11, 2013, Plaintiff Kebra Nagast, proceeding pro se, filed a

motion to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). (Dkt. No. 10.) 

Plaintiff subsequently filed an amended complaint. (Dkt. No. 12.) On June 28, 2013,

Defendants filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s amended complaint. (Dkt. No. 14. ) 

For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion to proceed IFP. The

Court further sets the following BRIEFING SCHEDULE on Defendants’ motion to

- 1 - 13cv0380-GPC-JMA

Case 3:13-cv-00380-GPC-JMA Document 15 Filed 06/28/13 Page 1 of 3
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

dismiss. 

DISCUSSION

I. Motion to Proceed IFP

Plaintiff moves to proceed IFP under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 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, must pay a filing fee of $350.00. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). An action may proceed despite a plaintiff's failure to

prepay the entire fee only if the plaintiff is granted leave to proceed in forma

pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176,

1177 (9th Cir. 1999). Section 1915(a) allows a court to authorize a lawsuit's

commencement without payment of the filing fee if the plaintiff submits an affidavit

demonstrating his or her inability to pay the filing fee. The benefit of proceeding in

forma pauperis is a privilege, not a right. Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1231

(9th Cir. 1984). Such affidavit must include a complete statement of the plaintiff's

assets. A petitioner need not "be absolutely destitute to enjoy the benefit of this

statute." Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948);

Jefferson v. United States, 277 F.2d 723, 725 (9th Cir.1960), cert. denied, 364 U.S.

896 (1960). He must, however, demonstrate his poverty with "some particularity,

definiteness, and certainty." United States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir.

1981) ( per curiam ). 

Here, Plaintiff submits a declaration of his assets. Plaintiff declares he is

currently unemployed, and he was last employed sometime in 2012. He declares he

has no savings, IRA, or CDS separate from his checking account. He does not own

an automobile, real estate or any other property or assets. Plaintiff states that he

receives disability benefits and food stamps, but he does not indicate the amount he

receives from these benefits. 

Based on Plaintiff’s submission, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has

sufficiently shown that he is unable to pay the required filing fee. As such, Plaintiff

- 2 - 13cv0380-GPC-JMA

Case 3:13-cv-00380-GPC-JMA Document 15 Filed 06/28/13 Page 2 of 3
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

meets the requirements to proceed IFP and the Court GRANTS his request. 

II. Briefing Schedule

On June 28, 2013, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s amended

complaint pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6). (Dkt. No. 14.) The Court set a hearing date

of December 13, 2013 at 1:30 p.m. Accordingly, the Court sets the following

BRIEFING SCHEDULE: Plaintiff shall file a response on or by Monday, August

5, 2013. Any replies shall be filed on or by Monday, August 19, 2013. 

CONCLUSION

For the above reasons, the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiff’s request to

proceed IFP. (Dkt. No. 10.) 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: June 28, 2013

HON. GONZALO P. CURIEL

United States District Judge

- 3 - 13cv0380-GPC-JMA

Case 3:13-cv-00380-GPC-JMA Document 15 Filed 06/28/13 Page 3 of 3