Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-03375/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-03375-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANDREA NARED,

Plaintiff.

 v.

JO ANNE BARNHART, 

Defendant. _______________________________________

No. C 06-3375 SBA

 

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Andrea Nared's ("Plaintiff") application to

proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP application"). Having read and considered the IFP application, and

being fully informed, the Court hereby DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff's IFP Application.

LEGAL STANDARD

Federal courts must review a case filed in forma pauperis prior to service of process. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e). An in forma pauperis complaint shall be dismissed if the allegation of poverty is not true,

or if the court determines that the action is 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 such relief. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2). 

The benefit of proceeding in forma pauperis is a privilege, not a right. Franklin v. Murphy, 745

F.2d 1221, 1231 (9th Cir. 1984). Thus, to obtain this privilege, a plaintiff must demonstrate, to the

Court's satisfaction, his or her inability to pay the requisite fees and costs. Williams v. Marshall, 795

F. Supp. 978, 979 (N.D. Cal. 1992). The facts concerning the alleged poverty must be stated with some

"particularity, definiteness and certainty." United States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981).

The Court has discretion to make a factual inquiry into the plaintiff's financial status and to deny his

request to proceed in forma pauperis where he is unable or unwilling to verify his poverty. Id. If the

Case 4:06-cv-03375-SBA Document 4 Filed 05/25/06 Page 1 of 2
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

Court determines that a plaintiff's allegation of poverty is untrue, it shall dismiss the case. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(A).

ANALYSIS

In the instant IFP Application, Plaintiff, who has retained counsel, states that she is unemployed

but receives welfare and social security income in unspecified amounts. Plaintiff further states that she

incurs monthly expenses of approximately $700. Because the information that Plaintiff has provided

does not set forth the specific amount of income Plaintiff receives, and does not clarify how Plaintiff

is able to afford retained counsel if she cannot otherwise afford to pay the relevant court expenses, the

Court is unable to conclude that Plaintiff has sufficiently demonstrated that she cannot pay court costs

and still be able to provide herself with the necessities of life. However, if Plaintiff still wishes to

proceed in forma pauperis, the Court will allow Plaintiff an opportunity to file an amended IFP

application that addresses the Court's concerns and clearly and consistently sets forth, with the requisite

detail, the circumstances of her financial status. 

CONCLUSION

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff's IFP Application is DENIED WITHOUT

PREJUDICE. Plaintiff must file an amended IFP Application or pay the requisite filing fee within

thirty (30) days of the filing date of this Order or this action will be dismissed without further notice

to Plaintiff. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 Dated: 5/25/06 SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:06-cv-03375-SBA Document 4 Filed 05/25/06 Page 2 of 2