Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-02185/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-02185-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:0421(d) Review HHS decision re disability determinations

---

1 

19cv2185-LL 

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 

MARY KATHLEEN WAGER, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner of 

Social Security, 

Defendant. 

 Case No.: 19cv2185-LL 

ORDER RE: MOTION TO 

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 

[ECF No. 2] 

 On November 18, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis. ECF No. 2. In this action, Plaintiff is seeking review and reversal of the final 

decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) that denied Plaintiff’s 

claim for disability benefits. ECF No. 1. 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 $400. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed 

despite a plaintiff’s failure to prepay the entire fee only if she 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). A federal court may authorize the commencement of an action 

without the prepayment of fees if the party submits an affidavit, including a statement of 

assets, showing that she is unable to pay the required filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Here, 

Case 3:19-cv-02185-LL Document 5 Filed 12/17/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2 

19cv2185-LL 

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

Plaintiff submitted an affidavit indicating that her sole source of income is from public 

assistance in the amount of $192 a month. ECF No. 3 at 3. Plaintiff also states that she has 

$326 in income, but from an unspecified source. Id. Plaintiff is not employed and only has 

$25.00 in cash. Id. at 3. Plaintiff has no bank account. Id. Plaintiff represents that she owns 

one asset, a Kia Sorento motor vehicle, worth $300. Id. at 2. Based on the above, the Court 

concludes that Plaintiff’s application demonstrates she is unable to pay the requisite fees 

and costs. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma 

pauperis. 

 The Court must screen every civil action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) 

and dismiss any case it finds “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to state a claim on which relief 

may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from relief.” 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Calhoun v. Stahl, 254 F.3d 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (“[T]he 

provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) are not limited to prisoners.”); Lopez v. Smith, 

203 F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (noting that “section 1915(e) not only 

permits but requires a district court to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that fails to 

state a claim”). 

 All complaints must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that 

the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not 

required, but “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere 

conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) 

(citation omitted). In Social Security appeals, judges in this circuit have found that a 

complaint challenging the denial of benefits must contain the following basic requirements 

to satisfy the Court’s screening: 

First, the plaintiff must establish that he has exhausted her administrative 

remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and that the civil action was 

commenced within sixty days after notice of a final decision. Second, the 

complaint must indicate the judicial district in which the plaintiff resides. 

Third, the complaint must state the nature of the plaintiff's disability and when 

the plaintiff claims she became disabled. Fourth, the complaint must contain 

a plain, short, and concise statement identifying the nature of the plaintiff's 

Case 3:19-cv-02185-LL Document 5 Filed 12/17/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3 

19cv2185-LL 

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

disagreement with the determination made by the Social Security 

Administration and show that the plaintiff is entitled to relief. 

Montoya v. Colvin, No. 216CV00454RFBNJK, 2016 WL 890922, at *2 (D. Nev. Mar. 8, 

2016). 

 Here, Plaintiff appeals the Commissioner’s decision denying Plaintiff’s claim for 

disability benefits. ECF No. 1. However, Plaintiff fails to state the nature of her disability 

and when she became disabled, stating only that the denial of her claim for “SSI benefits 

[has] result[ed] in a downward spiral of health and wellness issues.” Id. As set forth above, 

this omission renders the complaint insufficient to survive the sua sponte screening 

required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s complaint. Plaintiff MAY FILE an amended complaint on or 

before January 31, 2020. Should Plaintiff fail to file an amended complaint within the 

time provided, the Court may enter a final order dismissing this civil action with prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: December 17, 2019 

Case 3:19-cv-02185-LL Document 5 Filed 12/17/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3