(SS) Dominguez v. Commissioner of Social Security ( 2024 )

2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 JENNIFER DOMINGUEZ, CASE NUMBER: 1:23-cv-01785-GSA 7 Plaintiff, 8 FINDINGS AND v. RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY 9 APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Commissioner of FORMA PAUPERIS AND TO 10 Social Security, REQUIRE FILING FEE PAYMENT, AND DIRECTING CLERK TO 11 RANDOMLY ASSIGN A UNITED Defendant. STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 (Doc. 2) 13 14 15 16 17 On December 29, 2023 Plaintiff filed a complaint in this Court and applied to proceed 18 without prepayment of fees (in forma pauperis) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Docs. 1–2. 19 I. Legal Standard 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. § 22 1915(a)(1). “To proceed in forma pauperis is a privilege not a right.” Smart v. Heinze, 347 F.2d 23 114, 116 (9th Cir. 1965). In enacting the in forma pauperis statute, “Congress intended to 24 guarantee that no citizen shall be denied an opportunity to commence, prosecute, or defend an 25 action, civil or criminal, in any court of the United States, solely because . . . poverty makes it 26 impossible . . . to pay or secure the costs of litigation.” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 31 27 (1992) (internal quotations and citations omitted). 28 The determination whether a party may proceed in forma pauperis is a “matter within the discretion of the trial court . . .” Weller v. Dickinson, 314 F.2d 598, 600 (9th Cir. 1963). To 2 proceed in forma pauperis a plaintiff need not demonstrate that he is completely destitute, but his 3 poverty must prevent him from paying the filing fee and providing himself and his dependents (if 4 any) with the necessities of life. Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339–40 5 (1948). 6 Although there is no bright line rule, courts look to the federal poverty guidelines 7 developed each year by the Department of Health and Human Services. See, e.g., Lint v. City of 8 Boise, No. CV09-72-S-EJL, 2009 WL 1149442, at *2 (D. Idaho Apr. 28, 2009) (and cases cited 9 therein). 10 II. Findings 11 Plaintiff’s application reflects that her three-person household (one spouse and one 12 dependent child) receives income totaling $4,889 per month ($58,668 per year), which is 13 substantially in excess (about 235%) of the federal poverty guidelines for a household of three 14 ($24,860).1 This suggests the ability to pay the $405 filing fee without sacrificing the necessities 15 of daily life. 16 III. Recommendation 17 Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma 18 pauperis be denied (Doc. 2). 19 The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to randomly assign this case to a United States District 20 Judge for resolution of these findings and recommendations pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 21 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). 22 Within fourteen (14) days from the filing of these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff 23 may file written objections with the court. L.R. 304(b). Such a document should be captioned 24 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 25 failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. 26 Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838–39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 27 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 28 1 See https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty-economic-mobility/poverty-guidelines 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 Dated: January 4, 2024 /s/ Gary S. Austin 4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28