Starski v. CorePHP, LLC

Filing 16

ORDER REQUIRING FURTHER INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF IFP APPLICATION (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 11/29/2011) (Additional attachment(s) added on 11/29/2011: # 1 Envelope) (tf, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

EDWARD STARSKI,

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

No. C 11-03740 SI

Plaintiff,

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND ORDER
REQUIRING FURTHER INFORMATION
IN SUPPORT OF IFP APPLICATION

v.
CorePHP, LLC,
Defendant.

/

13
14

Currently before the Court is plaintiff’s second application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP)

15

pursuant to 28 § U.S.C. 1915. Docket No. 6. Plaintiff’s first application was denied without prejudice

16

because did not sign the application. Defendant has appeared in order to oppose plaintiff’s second

17

application. Defendant contends that the second IFP application is defective and contains untrue,

18

inaccurate and incorrect statements. Docket No. 10. Defendant has submitted evidence, in the form of

19

declarations regarding postings allegedly made by plaintiff on various web sites about plaintiff’s past

20

employment, assets, income and activities. Even if the Court accepted that the postings identified by

21

defendant were actually made by the plaintiff in this case – something which has not been demonstrated

22

– those postings do not directly contradict the statements made by plaintiff in his IFP application

23

regarding income in the past 12 months and his current financial situation. Nonetheless, defendant’s

24

opposition raises questions regarding plaintiff’s assets which the Court believes should be addressed.

25

Therefore, the Court ORDERS plaintiff to show cause by filing a supplemental affidavit, signed

26

under penalty of perjury, that identifies the address of the home he owns as well as any other property

27

in which he has a financial interest. Plaintiff must also declare that he has listed all of his assets on his

28

second IFP application and affirm that all of his statements made in that application (Docket No. 6) are

1

true and correct. Plaintiff must file this supplemental affidavit, or pay the $350 filing fee, on or before

2

December 14, 2011. If plaintiff fails to file the supplemental affidavit or filing fee on or before this

3

date, the Court will deny the request for IFP and the action will be dismissed without prejudice

4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6
7

Dated: November 29, 2011
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2