(PS) Ireland v. United Parcel Service ( 2022 )


Menu:
  • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEROME IRELAND, JR., Case No. 1:21-cv-01801-DAD-SKO 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 13 v. SHOULD NOT BE DENIED 14 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, (Doc. 2) 15 Defendant. 21-DAY DEADLINE 16 17 On December 22, 2021, Plaintiff Jerome Ireland, Jr., proceeding pro se, filed a complaint, 18 along with an application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Docs. 1, 2.) 19 According to Plaintiff’s application, his “seasonal” gross pay/wages and take-home pay/wages are 20 both $8,000,000,000. (Doc. 2 at 1.) This is enough to pay the $402 filing fee in this action. 21 Therefore, Plaintiff must show why he is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis.1 22 Proceeding in forma pauperis “is a privilege not a right.” Smart v. Heinze, 347 F.2d 114, 23 116 (9th Cir. 1965). While a party need not be completely destitute to proceed in forma pauperis, 24 Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339–40 (1948), “‘the same even-handed 25 care must be employed to assure that federal funds are not squandered to underwrite, at public 26 expense, either frivolous claims or the remonstrances of a suitor who is financially able, in whole 27 1 1 or in material part, to pull his own oar,’” Ross v. San Diego Cty., No. 08CV0107-BEN (RBB), 2008 2 WL 440413, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 14, 2008) (citation omitted). Hence, “the court shall dismiss the 3 case at any time if the court determines that the [plaintiff’s] allegation of poverty is untrue.” 28 4 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(A). 5 Plaintiff’s application indicates that he has adequate funds to pay the filing fee for this 6 action. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff, within 21 days of the date of service of this 7 order, to show cause in writing why his application to proceed in forma pauperis should not be 8 denied. Failure to respond to this order will result in a recommendation that this action be 9 dismissed for failure to obey a court order. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 12 Dated: December 30, 2021 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Document Info

Docket Number: 1:21-cv-01801

Filed Date: 1/3/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 6/19/2024