Pastor v. Woodmont RES et al

Filing 6

ORDER denying 5 Motion for Reconsideration re 5 MOTION for Reconsideration re 4 Order on Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Michael Anthony Pastor. Notwithstanding, Plaintiff is permitted to file an amended IFP application by May 29, 2015 or pay the filing fee. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/7/2015)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

MICHAEL ANTHONY PASTOR,

Case No. 15-cv-01447-KAW

Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
10

WOODMONT RES,
Defendant.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION OF DENIAL OF
APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN
FORMA PAUPERIS; ORDER
PERMITTING PLAINTIFF TO SUBMIT
AN AMENDED IFP APPLICATION
Re: Dkt. No. 5

12
13

On April 8, 2015, the Court denied Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis

14

(IFP), because he represented that he received a combined $1,238.00 per week in state worker’s

15

compensation and disability insurance payments. (See IFP Application, Dkt. No. 2 at 2) Thus, the

16

Court ordered that Plaintiff pay the filing fee on or before April 27, 2015. (Dkt. No. 4.)

17

On April 27, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the denial of his IFP

18

application. (Pl.’s Mot., Dkt. No. 5.) Therein, Plaintiff stated that his annual income is less than

19

$25,000, that he provides for a teenage daughter, and that, since October 2014, his “income has

20

been $536.00 per week from State Disability Insurance alone.” Id. at 1.

21

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-9(a), Plaintiff was required to obtain leave of court to file

22

the motion for reconsideration. Plaintiff did not obtain leave, so his motion for reconsideration is

23

DENIED.

24

Notwithstanding, Plaintiff is hereby given permission to file an amended IFP application

25

that includes his entire financial picture, including all income received from all sources, on or

26

before May 29, 2015. Also, in response to question 4b, Plaintiff should list all individuals who

27

depend on him for support and how much he contributes to their support, including his teenage

28

daughter. If Plaintiff does not contribute to his daughter’s financial support, she should not be

1
2

listed.
Plaintiff is advised that if his benefits are similar to that in his original application—which

3

amounted to almost $5,000 per month— his application will again be denied, because he has the

4

means to pay the filing fee.

5
6
7
8

Failure to file an amended IFP application by May 29, 2015, or pay the $400.00 filing fee,
may result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 7, 2015
__________________________________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

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