Order Form (01/2005)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Name of Assigned Judge

or Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Kendall Sitting Judge if Otherthan Assigned Judge

CASE NUMBER 12 C 4521 DATE 7/3/2012

CASE

TITLE

Jackson vs. Astrue

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT

Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [3] is granted.

O[ For further details see text below.] Docketing to mail notices.

STATEMENT

 Plaintiff Anthony Jackson (“Jackson”) moves the Court to proceed in forma pauperis without the full

prepayment of filing fees. For the reasons stated below, the Court grants Jackson’s Motion. 

 Jackson is appealing a final administrative decision by Social Security Commissioner Michael J. Astrue

that denied his application for Social Security Disability benefits for lack of disability. Jackson claims that he

was not given a full and fair hearing by the Administrative Law Judge. Jackson alleges that the finding that

he is not disabled is not supported by substantial evidence and was not made in accordance with legal

standards for the determination of disability as set forth by the Social Security Act. 

 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the Court may authorize Jackson to proceed in forma pauperis if he is

unable to pay the mandated court fees. Jackson need not be penniless to proceed in forma pauperis under §

1915(a)(1). See Zaun v. Dobbin, 628 F.2d 990, 992 (7th Cir. 1980). Instead, he is eligible to proceed in forma

pauperis if payment of the filing fee will prevent him from providing for life’s necessities. See Id. According

to his financial affidavit, Jackson is unemployed. Jackson’s only source of income is $200 per month for

medical care from a safety net provider due to his status as an uninsured person. Jackson lives alone, owns no

financial instruments automobile, real estate or other property. Jackson indicates that he is unable to pay

child support for his daughter, his sole dependent. Based on these facts, Jackson’s financial affidavit sets

forth his inability to pay the mandated court fees. 

 The Court, however, must look beyond Jackson’s financial status. Section 1915 requires the Court to

review an action of a plaintiff who seeks to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the action if it is frivolous

or malicious, if it fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or if the plaintiff seeks damages from

a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii); see also Lindell v.

12C4521 Jackson vs. Astrue Page 1 of 2
STATEMENT

McCallum, 352 F.3d 1107, 1109 (7th Cir. 2003). Here, Jackson alleges that the Defendant improperly denied

him application for benefits based on a finding that he was not disabled. He alleges that the Commissioner’s

findings of fact are not supported by the evidence in the administrative record, the finding was not made in

accordance with legal standards for the determination of disability as set forth by the Social Security Act, and

he was not given a full and fair hearing by the Administrative Law Judge. Jackson’s Complaint provides

adequate notice of the charges and does not appear frivolous or otherwise meritless. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e5e; see also Tyson v. Gannett Co., 538 F.3d 781, 783 (7th Cir. 2008). An individual may bring a federal civil

action within sixty days of a adverse determination by the Appeals Council. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); accord

Sims v. Apfel, 530 U.S. 103, 106-107 (2000). Jackson received a final decision from the Appeals Council on

May 3, 2012, and filed suit on June 11, 2012. Therefore, Jackson’s Complaint is properly before the Court. 

 For the reasons stated above, Jackson’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is granted. 

12C4521 Jackson vs. Astrue Page 2 of 2