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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KULDIP SINGH, No. 1:24-cv-00533-JLT-BAM 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WITH A 13 v. MODIFICATION, DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION 14 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL TO PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYMENT SECURITY, OF FEES AND COSTS, AND DIRECTING 15 PLAINTIFF TO FILE A LONG FORM IN Defendant. FORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION OR PAY 16 THE FILING FEE IN FULL WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS 17 (Docs. 2, 4) 18 19 Kuldip Singh, proceeding with counsel, commenced this Social Security action on May 6, 20 2024. (Doc. 1.) Concurrent with his complaint, Plaintiff also filed an application to proceed in 21 forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Doc. 2.) 22 On May 7, 2024, the assigned magistrate judge issued Findings and Recommendations 23 that recommended Plaintiff’s application to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs be 24 denied and that Plaintiff be required to pay the $405.00 filing fee in full to proceed with this 25 action. (Doc. 4.) The magistrate judge determined that Plaintiff had not made the showing 26 required by section 1915 that he is unable to pay the required fees for this action, noting that 27 Plaintiff’s household estimated annual income was $37,584, nearly twice that of the federal 28 poverty guidelines, and there was no indication that Plaintiff was unable to pay the filing fee 1 | while also providing for the necessities of life. Ud. at 2.) 2 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on May 7, 2024, and notified 3 | Plaintiff that any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 4 at 2.) The Court also informed 4 | Plaintiff that “the failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of 5 | the ‘right to challenge the magistrate’s factual findings’ on appeal.” (/d. at 2-3, quoting Wilkerson 6 | v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014).) No objections were filed and the time to do so 7 | has expired. 8 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(c), this Court conducted a de novo review of the case. 9 | Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, the Court concludes that the Findings and 10 | Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis with the following 11 | modification. Because Plaintiff has not yet submitted or been directed to file a long form in 12 | forma pauperis application, dismissal will be without prejudice to the submission of a long form 13 | application if Plaintiff reasonably believes doing so will demonstrate indigency. Accordingly, the 14 | Court ORDERS: 15 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on May 7, 2024 (Doc. 4) are 16 ADOPTED. 17 2. Plaintiff's application to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs (Doc. 2) is 18 DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 19 3. Within 30 days following service of this order, Plaintiff shall either file a long 20 form in forma pauperis application or pay the $405.00 filing fee in full to proceed 21 with this action. 22 4. Plaintiffs failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of this action 23 without further notice. 24 95 IT IS SO ORDERED. | Dated: _ May 24, 2024 Charis [Tourn TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 27 28