Rodriguez v. Kijakazi ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PATRICIA R., Case No.: 20cv1771-LL 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING WITHOUT 13 v. PREJUDICE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA 14 ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner of PAUPERIS Social Security, 15 Defendant. [ECF No. 2] 16 17 18 Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s application for leave to proceed in forma 19 pauperis (“IFP”). ECF No. 2. “An affidavit in support of an IFP application is sufficient 20 where it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court costs and still afford the necessities of 21 life.” Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015) (citing Adkins v. E.I. 22 DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948)). “[A] plaintiff seeking IFP status 23 must allege poverty ‘with some particularity, definiteness and certainty.’” Id. (quoting 24 United States v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981)). Here, Plaintiff’s application 25 is not on the form preferred by this Court, which requires more information about income, 26 assets, and expenses than provided by Plaintiff. Accordingly, the application is DENIED 27 WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 28 / / / 1 Plaintiff may file a new application for leave to proceed IFP using the form AO 239 2 (Rev. 01/15), Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs 3 ||(Long Form). The form can be found on _ the Court’s website at 4 || https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/forms.aspx ?list=all. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 || Dated: September 24, 2020 NO 7 Qe F | g Honorable Linda Lopez 9 United States Magistrate Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28