Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00438/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00438-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 8:1446 Petition for Naturalization Hearing

---

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

 Plaintiff states that he is currently employed and earns a biweekly salary of $2500, that 1

he has $5000 in cash or accounts, and owns property valued at $500,000. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RUI DAI,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-08-0438 LKK GGH PS

vs.

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Department of Homeland Security, 

et al., 

Defendants.

 /

On February 26, 2008, plaintiff filed: (1) a complaint, (2) the filing fee required

to file an action in this court, and (3) an application to proceed in forma pauperis without

prepayment of fees (28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)). The court has reviewed plaintiff’s application and

concludes plaintiff has not made the showing required to proceed in forma pauperis. Therefore,

1

plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis should be denied and this case should

proceed as a regular civil case.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s application to

proceed in forma pauperis (Docket Entry No. 2) be denied.

\\\\\

Case 2:08-cv-00438-LKK -GGH Document 7 Filed 04/14/08 Page 1 of 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

2

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within ten days

after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections

with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings

and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified

time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153

(9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: 04/14/08

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ggh5:Dai.0438.ifpfee

Case 2:08-cv-00438-LKK -GGH Document 7 Filed 04/14/08 Page 2 of 2