Source: http://wa.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20180319_0001855.WWA.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 03:53:19+00:00

Document:
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant's motion to dismiss and for discovery sanctions (Dkt. No. 44). Having thoroughly considered the parties' briefing and the relevant record, the Court finds oral argument unnecessary and hereby GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the motion for the reasons explained herein.
The Court may waive the filing fee for a plaintiff who brings an action upon a showing that the plaintiff is “unable to pay.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). For the Court to consider such a request, a plaintiff must submit “an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets” and other information demonstrating that “the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still afford the necessities of life.” Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015). Once a court grants an application to proceed in forma pauperis, the case must be dismissed “any time” a court determines that an “allegation of poverty is untrue” and made in bad faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(A); Escobedo, 787 F.3d at 1232 n.8; see also Finan v. Good Earth Tools, Inc., 565 F.3d 1076, 1080 (8th Cir. 2009) (dismissal pursuant to § 1915(e)(2)(A) is at the discretion of the court); Thomas v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., 288 F.3d 305, 308 (7th Cir. 2001) (same); Mathis v. New York Life Insurance Company, 133 F.3d 546, 548 (7th Cir. 1998) (same).
Defendant's I-864 support obligation is reduced by the extent of other sources of income. See Erler, 824 F.3d at 1178 (9th Cir. 2016). Therefore, the amount and source of Plaintiff's income is a key issue in this case. Accordingly, Defendant received a variety of Plaintiff's financial records throughout discovery and deposed Plaintiff on various financial matters. (See generally Dkt. Nos. 45, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 63, 64.) Based on the information Defendant gathered, he concluded that Plaintiff misrepresented her income, assets, and living expenses to the Court when preparing her affidavit of poverty. (Dkt. No. 44 at 2.) On this basis, Defendant moves to dismiss. (Id.) The Court reviewed the briefing and exhibits relating to Defendant's motion to dismiss and was unable to reconcile the amounts Plaintiff reported in her affidavit of poverty with the financial activity occurring in her monthly bank and credit card statements. The Court then sought additional briefing from Plaintiff to address this issue. (See Dkt. No. 65.) Based on the totality of evidence before it, the Court concludes that Plaintiff's affidavit of poverty contained bad-faith misrepresentations rather than mere inaccuracies.
Plaintiff's affidavit of poverty, prepared on April 22, 2017 and filed by counsel two days later, stated that Plaintiff had: no cash no hand; a checking account balance of $900; $23, 000 in in a brokerage account that was “on loan from [her] parents” that she was obligated to return “once [she] become[s] more financially stable;” income over the last twelve months under $10, 000, with the majority being gifts; and monthly living expenses just over $1, 000 per month. (Dkt. Nos. 1 at 1-2, 58 at ¶ 6.) The Court cannot reconcile these amounts with Plaintiff's financial records and her deposition testimony, which indicate significantly higher income and assets and significantly lower living expenses.

References: § 1915
 v. 
 § 1915
 v. 
 § 1915
 v. 
 v.