Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-05711/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-05711-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28:1331(a) Fed. Question: Real Property

---

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 This disposition is not designated for publication and may not be cited.

Case No. C 06-05711 JF (PVT)

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

(JFLC2)

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

**Filed 10/6/2006** 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

D. LIN NGUYEN,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

THE LAW OFFICE OF PHUC DINH DO, PHUC

DIN DO,

 Defendants.

Case Number C 06-05711 JF (PVT)

ORDER1 DENYING WITHOUT

PREJUDICE APPLICATION TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

[re: docket no. 2 ]

Petitioner filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis on September 19, 2006. 

Plaintiff filed a complaint in this action on the same date. This complaint consists of a series of

unmarked exhibits preceded by this paragraph:

I, D. Lin Nguyen, declare that I personally know the facts recited below and if

called as a witness would and could competently testify thereto. I have the Chapter

13 Case # 96-54287JRG. Why didn’t you follow the contract that we both signed

to help me? Why did I hire you because the Law Office of David A. Boone opened

a second Chapter 13 that made me lose my contractor license of Western Roofing

Company.

 

The complaint provides no explanation of the attached documents. 

Case 5:06-cv-05711-JF Document 4 Filed 10/06/06 Page 1 of 3
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

Case No. C 06-05711 JF (PVT)

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

(JFLC2)

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, a district court may authorize the commencement of a civil

action in forma pauperis if the court is satisfied that the would-be plaintiff cannot pay the filing

fees necessary to pursue the action. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). The Court may deny in forma

pauperis status, however, if it appears from the face of the proposed complaint that the action is

frivolous or without merit. O’Loughlin v. Doe, 920 F.2d 614, 616 (9th Cir. 1990); Tripati v. First

National Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1370 (9th Cir. 1987). The Court will DENY without

prejudice his application to proceed in forma pauperis on the ground that his complaint as

presently framed, on its face, fails to state a cognizable claim. See Sargeant v. Dixon, 130 F.3d

1067, 1069 (D.C. Cir. 1997). 

DATED: October 6, 2006

__________________________________

JEREMY FOGEL

United States District Judge

Case 5:06-cv-05711-JF Document 4 Filed 10/06/06 Page 2 of 3
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

Case No. C 06-05711 JF (PVT)

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

(JFLC2)

Copies of Order mailed on October 6, 2006 to:

D. Lin Nguyen

2174 Diana Place

San Jose, CA 95116

Case 5:06-cv-05711-JF Document 4 Filed 10/06/06 Page 3 of 3