Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-01107/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-01107-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:0405id Review of HHS Decision (SSID)

---

1

16cv1107-LAB-BGS

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

Susie V. Scales,

Plaintiff,

v.

Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner 

of Social Security,

Defendant.

Case No.: 16cv1107-LAB-BGS

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

I. BACKGROUND

Before this Court is a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”), filed by 

Plaintiff Susie V. Scales. (ECF No. 2.) Plaintiff filed a Complaint seeking judicial 

review of a decision by the Commissioner of Social Security denying her application for 

disability benefits. (ECF No. 1.)

II. DISCUSSION

All parties instituting any civil action, suit, or proceeding in a district court of the

United States, except an application for a writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee. 

24 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a plaintiffs failure to prepay the 

entire fee only if she is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(I),

Case 3:16-cv-01107-LAB-BGS Document 5 Filed 05/12/16 Page 1 of 4
2

16cv1107-LAB-BGS

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

[A]ny court of the United States may authorize the commencement,

prosecution or defense of any suit, action or proceeding . . . without

prepayment of fees or security therefor, by a person who submits an affidavit

that includes a statement of all assets such [person] possesses that the person

is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.

The determination of indigency falls within the district court’s discretion. 

California Men’s Colony v. Rowland, 939 F.2d 854, 858 (9th Cir. 1991), reversed 

on other grounds, 506 U.S. 194 (1993) (“Section 1915 typically requires the 

reviewing court to exercise its sound discretion in determining whether the affiant 

has satisfied the statute’s requirement of indigency.”).

It is well-settled that a party need not be completely destitute to proceed in 

forma pauperis. Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339-40 

(1948). To satisfy the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), “an affidavit [of 

poverty] is sufficient which states that one cannot because of his poverty pay or 

give security for costs . . . and still be able to provide himself and dependents with 

the necessities of life.” Id. at 339. At the same time, however, “the same evenhanded care must be employed to assure that federal funds are not squandered to 

underwrite, at public expense, . . . the remonstrances of a suitor who is financially 

able, in whole or in material part, to pull his own oar.” Temple v. Ellerthorpe, 586 

F.Supp. 848, 850 (D.R.I. 1984).

District courts, therefore, tend to reject IFP applications where the applicant 

can pay the filing fee with acceptable sacrifice to other expenses. See, e.g., 

Stehouwer v. Hennessey, 851 F.Supp. 316, (N.D.Cal. 1994), vacated in part on 

other grounds, Olivares v. Marshall, 59 F.3d 109 (9th Cir. 1995) (finding that 

district court did not abuse discretion in requiring partial fee payment from 

prisoner with $14.61 monthly salary and $110 per month from family); Allen v. 

Kelly, 1995 WL 396860 at *2 (N.D. Cal. 1995) (Plaintiff initially permitted to 

Case 3:16-cv-01107-LAB-BGS Document 5 Filed 05/12/16 Page 2 of 4
3

16cv1107-LAB-BGS

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

proceed in forma pauperis, later required to pay $120 filing fee out of $900 

settlement proceeds); Ali v. Cuyler, 547 F.Supp. 129, 130 (E.D. Pa. 1982) (in 

forma pauperis application denied: “plaintiff possessed savings of $450 and the 

magistrate correctly determined that this amount was more than sufficient to allow 

the plaintiff to pay the filing fee in this action.”). Moreover, the facts as to the

affiant’s poverty must be stated “with some particularity, definiteness, and 

certainty.” United States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981).

Here, Plaintiff receives $407 a month from early retirement, and $194 a 

month in food stamps. (ECF No. 2 at 2.) Plaintiff’s expenses total, at a minimum,

$353, not including food costs. (Id. at 3.) Plaintiff states that she has been 

unemployed since 2012, and has no assets or money in cash, checking, or saving 

accounts. (Id. at 2.) Based on the information provided, the Court finds that 

Plaintiff is unable to pay the required filing fee. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to 

proceed IFP is GRANTED.

III. CONCLUSION

For the reasons addressed above, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion to

proceed IFP (ECF No. 2). In light of the Court’s ruling on the IFP motion, the 

Court orders as follows:

1. The United States Marshal shall serve a copy of the Complaint filed on May 7, 

2016 and an accompanying summons upon Defendants as directed by Plaintiff 

on U.S. Marshal Form 285. All costs of service shall be advanced by the 

United States.

2. Plaintiff shall serve upon Defendant, or, if appearance has been entered by

counsel, upon Defendant’s counsel, a copy of every further pleading or 

document submitted for consideration of the Court. Plaintiff shall include with 

the original paper to be filed with the Clerk of the Court a certificate stating the 

manner in which a true and correct copy of any document was served on 

Defendant or Defendant’s counsel and the date of service. Any paper received 

Case 3:16-cv-01107-LAB-BGS Document 5 Filed 05/12/16 Page 3 of 4
4

16cv1107-LAB-BGS

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

by a District Judge or Magistrate Judge that has not been filed with the Clerk or 

that fails to include a Certificate of Service will be disregarded.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 12, 2016

Case 3:16-cv-01107-LAB-BGS Document 5 Filed 05/12/16 Page 4 of 4