Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00599/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00599-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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 

DEPUTY 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

FREDDERICKA T. BRADSHAW, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

DISCOVER FINANCIAL 

SERVICES, INC., 

Defendants. 

CASE NO. 13-CV-599 

ORDER DENYING MOTION 

TO PROCEED IFP 

[Dkt. No.2] 

Plaintiff Freddericka T. Bradshaw has commenced a civil action against 

Defendant Discover Financial Services for violations ofthe Telephone Consumer 

Protection Act. (Dkt. No.1.) Plaintiff is proceeding with counsel. Instead of 

paying the $350.00 filing fee, Plaintiff moves to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP"). 

(Dkt. No.2.) For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs motion to proceed IFP is 

DENIED and the action is dismissed without prejudice. 

DISCUSSION 

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

the United States, except for an application for writ ofhabeas corpus, must pay a 

filing fee of$350.00. 28 U.S.C. § 1914. An action may proceed despite a 

plaintiff's failure to prepay the entire fee only ifthe plaintiff is granted leave to 

proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 

- 1 13cv599 

Case 3:13-cv-00599-BEN-BLM Document 3 Filed 04/11/13 Page 1 of 2
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 

1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). 

A party need not be completely destitute to proceed IFP. Adklns v. E.1 DuP~nt 

de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339-40 (1948). But, "thesmpe' even-handed care 

must be employed to assure that federal funds are not squandered to underwrite, at 

public expense, either frivolous claims or 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. SUppa 848, 850 (D.R.I. 1984) (citing Brewster V. North Am. Van 

Lines, Inc., 461 F.2d 649, 651 (7th Cir. 1972). 

In an attached declaration, Plaintiff states that she has a monthly salary of 

$1,758.00. She owns outright a car valued at $1,749.00, furniture valued at 

$900.00, a computer valued at $400,00, clothing valued at $250.00, and jewelry 

valued at $200.00. She indicates that she owns a house "valued at $99,199.00 with 

$226.858.83 owed." She reports average monthly expenses of$1999.55, which 

includes $1,029 for her mortgage, $40 for recreation, $40 for personal grooming 

and hygiene, and $91 for phonelInterneticell phone. 

Although this is a close case, it appears Plaintiff could pay the filing fee by 

making acceptable sacrifices to other expenses. The motion to proceed IFP is 

DENIED and the case is DISMISSED without prejudice. 

CONCLUSION 

For the reasons set forth above, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs motion to 

proceed IFP and DISMISSES the Complaint without prejudice. Plaintiff has 

forty-five (45) days from the date ofthis Order to reopen the case by paying the 

$350 filing fee. IfPlaintiff fails to do so, the case will remain closed. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

,. 

Dated: April /( ,2013 

- 2 - 13cv599 

Case 3:13-cv-00599-BEN-BLM Document 3 Filed 04/11/13 Page 2 of 2