Rush v. City of Fairfield ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 || CALVIN RUSH, et al., No. 2:21-cv—1120-WBS-KJN 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING IFP REQUEST 13 V. (ECF No. 2.) 14 | CITY OF FAIRFIELD, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiffs requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), and the motion was 18 || referred to the undersigned by the assigned district judge. (ECF Nos. 2, 3.) Title 28 U.S.C. 19 || Section 1915 authorizes the commencement of an action “without prepayment of fees or security” 20 | by a person that is unable to pay such fees. Plaintiffs’ affidavits make the required showing, and 21 || so their request to proceed IFP is GRANTED. See, e.g., Ketschau v. Byrne, 2019 WL 5266889, 22 | *1 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 17, 2019) (“A person is eligible if they are unable to pay the costs of filing 23 || and still provide the necessities of life... This generally includes incarcerated individuals with 24 || no assets and persons who are unemployed and dependent on government assistance.”). This 25 || matter is referred back to the assigned district judge. 26 | Dated: June 25, 2021 SD, rush.1120 He . jbl Nearer 98 KENDALL 1 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE