Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-06057/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-06057-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

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

1

 Plaintiff consents to having this matter heard and finally adjudicated by the

undersigned. FED.R.CIV.P. 73; 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Accordingly, this court has authority to

decide this application. See, e.g., Tripati v. Rison, 847 F.2d 548 (9th Cir.1988) (noting that

absent consent of all parties to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction, Magistrate Judge not

authorized to deny motion to proceed in forma pauperis). Because Defendant has not yet

been served, it is not a party to this action for purposes of determining jurisdiction under 28

U.S.C. § 636(c).

*E-filed 3/28/08*

NOT FOR CITATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

DARLENE BREWER,

Plaintiff,

 v.

COMERICA BANK,

Defendant. /

No. C07-06057 HRL

ORDER GRANTING (SECOND)

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS

Re: Docket No. 8

Darlene Brewer sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and concurrently

applied to proceed in forma pauperis. On March 17, 2008, this court denied1

 Plaintiff’s

application to proceed in forma pauperis because her income, as listed on the application, was

sufficient to allow Brewer to pay the court filing fee without depriving her of the ability to pay

for necessities. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1); Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S.

331, 339-340 (1948). [Docket No. 6]. Brewer then filed a second in forma pauperis

application. 

Case 5:07-cv-06057-HRL Document 9 Filed 03/28/08 Page 1 of 3
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

 Plaintiff has a continuing obligation to keep the court informed of her current

address. Failure to do so may result in dismissal of this action.

2

This second application satisfies the court that Brewer “cannot because of [her] poverty

pay or give security for the costs and still be able to provide [herself] and dependents' with the

necessities of life." Adkins, 335 U.S. at 339. Therefore, Plaintiff’s application is GRANTED

and the Clerk shall issue summons.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the U.S. Marshal for the Northern District of

California serve, without prepayment of fees, a copy of the complaint, any amendments,

attachments, scheduling orders, plaintiff's affidavit and this order upon the defendant. As set in

this court’s prior order, the deadline for serving that summons is June 12, 2008.

The case management conference shall be held on July 8, 2008 at 1:30 p.m (Courtroom

2, 5th floor of the United States District Court, San Jose). The parties' joint case management

statement is due July 1, 2008. 2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 3/28/08 

HOWARD R. LLOYD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 5:07-cv-06057-HRL Document 9 Filed 03/28/08 Page 2 of 3
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

THIS SHALL CERTIFY THAT NOTICE WILL BE SENT TO: 

Darlene Brewer

1035 McKay Drive #24

San Jose, CA 95131

Dated: 3/28/08 KRO 

Chambers of Magistrate Judge Lloyd

Case 5:07-cv-06057-HRL Document 9 Filed 03/28/08 Page 3 of 3