(SS) Souza v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 1:2023cv00675 - Document 4 (E.D. Cal. 2023)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS to Deny Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and to Require Filing Fee Payment and Directing Clerk of Court to Randomly Assign a United States District Judge, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 05/06/2023. Referred to Judge Thurston. Objections to F&R due within Fourteen-Days. (Maldonado, C)

Download PDF

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 JOANIE LEANNE SOUZA, 7 8 9 10 Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Commissioner of Social Security, 11 Defendant. 12 CASE NUMBER: 1:23-cv-00675-GSA FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND TO REQUIRE FILING FEE PAYMENT, AND DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO RANDOMLY ASSIGN A UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE (Doc. 2) 13 14 15 16 17 18 On May 2, 2023 Plaintiff filed a complaint in this Court and applied to proceed without prepayment of fees (in forma pauperis) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Docs. 1–2. 19 I. 20 In order to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, Plaintiff must submit an affidavit 21 demonstrating that he “is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). 22 “To proceed in forma pauperis is a privilege not a right.” Smart v. Heinze, 347 F.2d 114, 116 (9th 23 Cir. 1965). 24 citizen shall be denied an opportunity to commence, prosecute, or defend an action, civil or 25 criminal, in any court of the United States, solely because . . . poverty makes it impossible . . . to 26 pay or secure the costs of litigation.” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 31 (1992) (internal 27 quotations and citations omitted). 28 Legal Standard In enacting the in forma pauperis statute, “Congress intended to guarantee that no The determination whether a party may proceed in forma pauperis is a “matter within the 1 1 discretion of the trial court . . .” Weller v. Dickinson, 314 F.2d 598, 600 (9th Cir. 1963). To proceed 2 in forma pauperis a plaintiff need not demonstrate that he is completely destitute, but his poverty 3 must prevent him from paying the filing fee and providing himself and his dependents (if any) with 4 the necessities of life. Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339–40 (1948). 5 Although there is no bright line rule, courts look to the federal poverty guidelines developed each 6 year by the Department of Health and Human Services. See, e.g., Lint v. City of Boise, No. CV09- 7 72-S-EJL, 2009 WL 1149442, at *2 (D. Idaho Apr. 28, 2009) (and cases cited therein). 8 II. Findings 9 Plaintiff’s application reflects that her five-person household (1 spouse and 3 dependent 10 children) receives VA disability income totaling $8,400 per month ($100,800 per year), which is 11 substantially in excess of the federal poverty guidelines for a household of 5 ($35,140).1 This 12 strongly suggests an ability to pay the $402 filing fee without sacrificing the necessities of daily 13 life. 14 III. 15 Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma 16 Recommendation pauperis be denied (Docs. 2). 17 The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to randomly assign this case to a United States District 18 Judge for resolution of these findings and recommendations pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 19 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). 20 recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the court. L.R. 304(b). Such a 21 document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” 22 Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver 23 of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838–39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. 24 Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). Within fourteen (14) days from the filing of these findings and 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 27 28 1 May 6, 2023 /s/ Gary S. Austin See https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty-economic-mobility/poverty-guidelines (last accessed 5/4/2023) 2 1 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.