Londono v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 4

ORDER Denying 3 Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis without Prejudice, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 12/21/16. (Verduzco, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DIERDRA LONDONO,

12
13
14
15
16

Plaintiff,
vs.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY.,

1:16-cv-01897-EPG
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO PROCEED
IN FORMA PAUPERIS WITHOUT
PREJUDICE
(ECF No. 3)

Defendant.

17
18
19
20
21
22

On December 19, 2016, Plaintiff Dierdra Londono filed a complaint seeking judicial
review of a final decision by the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying
her application for disability benefits. Additionally, Plaintiff simultaneously filed a motion to
proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP application”). (ECF No. 3.)
As an initial matter, the IFP application is made by “Dierdra L. Burston.” However, the

23

docket indicates that the complaint was filed Plaintiff Dierdra Londono. The complaint states

24

that this case was initiated by “Dierdra Burston Londono.” (ECF No. 1.) While the Court can

25

surmise that the IFP applicant is likely the same person as the person initiating this case, the

26

IFP application should accurately reflect the name of Plaintiff. This inconsistency can be fixed

27

upon re-filing the IFP application.

28
1

1

Second, question 3 of the IFP asks whether Plaintiff has received any money from other

2

sources, to which Plaintiff responded in the affirmative. The second part of the question asks

3

the applicant to provide details concerning the source of money, the amount received and what

4

you expect you will continue to receive. Plaintiff answered only that “[m]y husband supports

5

me.” The Court requires additional information in connection with this question, regarding the

6
7
8

amount of support and resources available to the husband.
The Court will deny the IFP application. (ECF No. 3.) However, Plaintiff may refile an
IFP application correcting the issues identified in this order.

9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11
12

Dated:

December 21, 2016

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2