Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-00192/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-00192-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 15:2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act

---

1

3:19-cv-0192-CAB-(WVG)

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

E. DRAKE,

Plaintiff,

v.

GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, 

INC.; PAPYRUS RECYCLED 

GREETINGS, INC.; SCHURMAN FINE 

PAPERS INC.,

Defendants.

Case No.: 3:19-cv-0192-CAB-(WVG)

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION 

TO PROCEED IN FORMA 

PAUPERIS

[Doc. No. 2.]

On, January 28, 2019, Plaintiff, a non-prisoner, filed a complaint asserting a myriad 

of claims including negligence, equal protection violations under 42 U.S.C § 1983, 

products liability, false and misleading advertising, breach of warranty, deceptive and 

unfair trade practices, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. [Doc. No. 1.] 

Plaintiff also filed a request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). [Doc. No. 2.] For the 

following reasons, Plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED.

Generally, all parties instituting a civil action in this court must pay a filing fee. See 

28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); CivLR 4.5(a). But, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the court may 

authorize the commencement, prosecution or defense of any suit without payment of fees 

if the plaintiff submits an affidavit, including a statement of all his or her assets, showing 

that he or she is unable to pay filing fees or costs. “An affidavit in support of an IFP 

application is sufficient where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still 

Case 3:19-cv-00192-CAB-WVG Document 3 Filed 01/30/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2

3:19-cv-0192-CAB-(WVG)

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

afford the necessities of life.” Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015). 

“[A] plaintiff seeking IFP status must allege poverty with some particularity, definiteness 

and certainty.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). The granting or denial of leave to 

proceed in forma pauperis in civil cases is within the sound discretion of the district court. 

Venerable v. Meyers, 500 F.2d 1215, 1216 (9th Cir. 1974) (citations omitted). 

In his IFP application Plaintiff states that he is disabled and has not worked since 

2005, and receives $1,145.00 a month in government assistance in the form of Social 

Security. [Doc. No. 2-1 at 2.] Further, he attests that he owes $22,000 in medical bills,

$400.00 to credit cards, has a $196.00 a month car payment, pays $205.00 in rent, spends 

$180.00 a month on food, outlays $95.00 on toiletries, clothing, utilities, and internet, pays 

$100.00 in insurance and has $40.00 left in his bank account and $18.00 in cash. [Id. at 2-

4.] 

Based on the “particularity, definiteness and certainty” in the information provided, 

the court is persuaded that Plaintiff lacks the funds to pay the filing fee and “still afford the 

necessities of life.” Escobedo, 787 F.3d at 1234. Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion to proceed 

IFP [Doc. No. 2] is GRANTED. 

Upon granting a request to proceed in forma pauperis, a court must additionally 

screen a complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1915(e). Specifically, federal courts are given 

the authority to dismiss a case if the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails state a 

claim upon which relief may be granted or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is 

immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). While not every one of the twenty-two 

causes of action pass muster, the Court finds sufficient allegations in Plaintiff’s complaint 

to survive the sua sponte screening required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b). 

Accordingly, the Court will direct the U.S. Marshal to effect service on Plaintiff’s behalf. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (“The officers of the court shall issue and serve all process and 

perform all duties in [IFP] cases.)’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) (“[T]he court may order that 

service be made by a United States marshal or deputy marshal . . . if the plaintiff is 

authorized to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.”).

Case 3:19-cv-00192-CAB-WVG Document 3 Filed 01/30/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3

3:19-cv-0192-CAB-(WVG)

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

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED:

1. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to issue a summons as to Plaintiff’s 

complaint [Doc. No. 1] upon Defendants and forward it to Plaintiff along with a blank U.S, 

Marshall Form 285s for each named Defendant. In addition, the Clerk is directed to 

provide Plaintiff with a certified copy of this Order and a certified copy of his complaint 

[Doc. No. 1] and the summons so that he may serve each named Defendant. Upon receipt 

of this “IFP Package,” Plaintiff is directed to complete the Form 285s as completely and 

accurately as possible, and to return them to the United States Marshall according to the 

instructions provided by the Clerk in the letter accompanying his IFP package.

2. Upon receipt, the U.S. Marshall is ORDERED to serve a copy of the complaint and 

summons upon the named Defendants as directed by Plaintiff on the Form 285s. All costs 

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

4(c)(3).

3. Plaintiff must serve upon the Defendants or, if appearance has been entered by 

counsel, upon Defendants’ counsel, a copy of every further pleading or other document 

submitted for consideration by the Court. Plaintiff must 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 the document was served on the Defendants, or counsel for Defendants, 

and the date of that service. Any paper received by the Court which has not been properly 

filed with the Clerk, or which fails to include a Certificate of Service, may be disregarded.

It is SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 30, 2019

Case 3:19-cv-00192-CAB-WVG Document 3 Filed 01/30/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3