Ali et al v. Integrated Benefits et al
Filing
3
ORDER denying 2 Motion to Proceed IFP and directing Karima Ali to file new IFP Application signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 11/23/2011. Motion for IFP due by 12/27/2011.(Lundstrom, T)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
10
11
KARIMA K. ALI; BRAWLEY INSURANCE CASE NO. 1:11-cv-01890-LJO-SMS
SERVICES, INC.,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF KARIMA
Plaintiffs,
ALI’S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS AND DIRECTING KARIMA ALI
v.
TO FILE NEW IFP APPLICATION
12
13
INTEGRATED BENEFITS
ADMINISTRATORS, INC., et al.,
14
Defendants.
(Doc. 2)
/
15
16
17
By a motion filed November 14, 2011, Plaintiff Karima Ali sought to proceed in forma
18
pauperis. Ms. Ali submitted an incomplete declaration that is not sufficient to make the showing
19
required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). First, Ms. Ali’s application indicates that she is unemployed;
20
has received no income of any kind within the last twelve months; has no cash, checking or
21
savings account; has no property of value; and must support her husband, Hussein O. Ali. Her
22
application is incomplete in that she failed to include the information requested at question 2b.
23
regarding her former employment. In addition, the Court finds Plaintiff’s claims that she
24
supports herself and her husband without savings, assets, income, or support from any other
25
source to strain credibility. If she elects to revise her application to proceed in forma pauperis, as
26
this order permits her to do, she is directed to include a brief statement explaining how her family
27
survives in view of her extraordinary poverty.
28
The Court’s second concern is ambiguity regarding Ms. Ali’s intent to include Plaintiff
Page 1 of 2
1
Brawley Insurance Services, Inc., as part of her application to proceed in forma pauperis. A
2
corporation is not considered to be a person entitled to proceed in forma pauperis under 28
3
U.S.C. § 1915. Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, Unit II Men’s Advisory Council, 506 U.S.
4
194, 212 (1993). Accordingly, even if Ms. Ali is eligible to proceed in forma pauperis, Brawley
5
Insurance Services will need to pay the filing fee.
6
In addition, a “corporation may appear in the federal courts only through licensed
7
counsel.” Id. at 202. See also Local Rule 83-183 (providing that a corporation or other entity
8
may appear only by an attorney). A president or shareholder may not represent a corporation in
9
court but must retain appropriate licensed counsel. United States v. High Country Broadcasting
10
Co., Inc., 3 F.3d 1244, 1245 (9th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 826 (1994). To proceed in
11
this matter, Brawley Insurance Services must retain an attorney.
12
Accordingly, the Court DENIES Ms. Ali’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Ms. Ali
13
may submit a new application to proceed in forma pauperis in accordance with this order within
14
thirty days. If the Clerk does not receive either a revised in forma pauperis application nor the
15
filing fee within thirty days of this order, this case will be dismissed without prejudice for failure
16
to prosecute.
17
18
19
20
IT IS SO ORDERED.
21
Dated:
icido3
November 23, 2011
/s/ Sandra M. Snyder
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 2 of 2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
