Linder v. Contra Costa County Sherif's Department et al

Filing 21

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF DENIAL OF APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS re 19 . Plaintiff either pay $350.00 or he may file another signed IFP application by 10/31/08. Case management conference is reset for 11/21/08 at 2:00 p.m.. Signed by Judge Susan Illston. (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/14/2008) (Additional attachment(s) added on 10/15/2008: # 1 cs) (ys, COURT STAFF).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 v. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendants. / JONATHAN LINDER, Plaintiff, No. C 08-0245 SI ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF DENIAL OF APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

By order filed June 30, 2008, the Court denied plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis. In that order, the Court noted that plaintiff had filed two signed applications to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff's March 31, 2008 application states that he has a bank account with a $5,000 balance and a "trading account" with a value of $25,000; monthly expenses of $1,160; and student loans in the amount of greater than $70,000. Plaintiff's May 23, 2008 application states that he has a bank account balance of $11,000; a "stock trading account" with a value of $23,000; monthly expenses of $1,160; a $3,000 balance on a Visa account; the following other debts: student loans $90,000; "SFGH" $12,000; "San Mateo County" $17,000; "taxes" $5,000; and "legal" $5,000. In the June 30, 2008 order, the Court found that based upon plaintiff's financial information, plaintiff is able to afford the $350 filing fee and costs of service. Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration states that plaintiff's financial resources were "misrepresented" on the in forma pauperis applications because he acts as the "informal conservator/trustee" for his partner, and he administers her finances through personal accounts in his own name. Plaintiff did not state what portion of the accounts and debts listed on the previous

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

applications was plaintiff's and what portion was his partner's. Based upon the information provided in plaintiff's motion for reconsideration, the Court is unable to determine the state of plaintiff's financial resources. Accordingly, the Court DENIES plaintiff's motion for reconsideration. (Docket No. 19). If plaintiff wishes to pursue this action, by October 31, 2008, plaintiff shall either pay the $350 filing fee, or he may file another signed in forma pauperis application which only states plaintiff's financial resources and debts (and does not include those of his partner). The Court VACATES the October 31, 2008 case management conference and RESCHEDULES the conference for November 21, 2008 at 2:00 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 14, 2008

SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge

2