Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-01290/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-01290-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 42:12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

---

1

18cv1290-BTM-NLS

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

JAIME REYES,

Plaintiff,

v.

LE PARFAIT GROUP LLC dba LE 

PARFAIT PARIS, BORDERS INC.,

Defendants.

Case No.: 18cv1290-BTM-NLS

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 

PROCEED IN FORMA 

PAUPERIS [ECF No. 3]

On June 14, 2018, Plaintiff filed his Complaint (ECF No. 1) along with an 

application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) (ECF No. 2). For the reasons 

discussed below, Plaintiff’s motion to proceed IFP is GRANTED.

DISCUSSION

Upon review of Plaintiff’s affidavit in support of his IFP motion, the Court finds 

that Plaintiff has made a sufficient showing of inability to pay the filing fee required 

to prosecute this action. Notwithstanding Plaintiff’s indigence, the Court is under 

a continuing duty to review a complaint filed by any person proceeding in forma 

pauperis to determine whether the action is “frivolous or malicious” or “fails to state 

a claim on which relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i),(ii). 

Plaintiff brings this action under the American with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 

Case 3:18-cv-01290-BTM-NLS Document 4 Filed 07/16/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2

18cv1290-BTM-NLS

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

42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq., and several California Civil Codes. Defendant Le 

Parfait Paris is a food and dining facility. Plaintiff alleges that he was denied full 

and equal access to Defendant’s facilities because it did not have ADA accessible 

dining seating or restroom facilities. The Court finds that the allegations in the 

Complaint are sufficient to satisfy the requirements under section 1915(e)(2)(B). 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. Plaintiff 

is permitted to prosecute this action without being required to prepay fees or costs 

and without being required to post security.

(2) The Clerk of Court shall file Plaintiff’s Complaint without prepayment of 

the filing fee. The Court directs the Clerk of Court to issue the summons, provide 

Plaintiff with a certified copy of both this Order and his Complaint (ECF No. 1), and 

forward them to Plaintiff along with a blank United States Marshal Service 

(“USMS”) Form 285 for each Defendant named in the Complaint. 

(3) Upon receipt of this “IFP Package,” the Court directs Plaintiff to 

complete Form 285 and forward it to the USMS. 

(4) Upon receipt, the USMS shall serve a summons and a copy of the 

Complaint upon Defendants as directed by Plaintiff on USMS Form 285. All costs 

of service shall be advanced by the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); Fed. 

R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3). 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: July 16, 2018

Case 3:18-cv-01290-BTM-NLS Document 4 Filed 07/16/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2