Spitters v. Psynergy et al

Filing 15

ORDER DENYING IFP APPLICATION WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 1/9/2019. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Application to Proceed IFP)(pjhlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/9/2019)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

THOMAS HEATON SPITTERS,

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 18-cv-03639-PJH

Plaintiff,

8
v.

ORDER DENYING IFP APPLICATION
WITHOUT PREJUDICE

PSYNERGY, et al.,

Re: Dkt. Nos. 12, 13

Defendants.

12
13
14

On June 18, 2018, plaintiff Thomas Spitters made a filing that opened this civil

15

action. Dkt. 1. On the same day, plaintiff filed an application to proceed in forma

16

pauperis (“IFP”), which would allow him to proceed with this action without prepaying fees

17

or costs. Dkt. 2. A plaintiff seeking to proceed in forma pauperis “must allege poverty

18

with some particularity, definiteness and certainty.” Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d

19

1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted). Plaintiff’s application did

20

not provide sufficient information to grant the application. For example, he wrote that his

21

income and saved cash were “de minimus.” Dkt. 2 at 1–2. His other descriptions were

22

similarly vague, including that he had “some” personal property and that “[v]arious

23

immediate and extended family, and their associated parties and individuals” depended

24

on him for support. Dkt. 2 at 2.

25

On September 10, 2018 this court denied plaintiff’s IFP application and adopted

26

the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation to dismiss the complaint with leave

27

to amend. Dkt. 8. Plaintiff was given a deadline of October 5, 2018 to file an amended

28

IFP application and complaint. Plaintiff has not filed an amended IFP application, nor has

1

he paid the filing fee. Rather, he has included in two separate filings statements

2

indicating that he would prefer not to disclose his financial condition to the court. Dkt. 12

3

at 1 (“plaintiff . . . wishes his pauperized financial condition to remain . . . confidential, and

4

secret”); Dkt. 13 at 5 (“plaintiff again states his overall desire and right to have his

5

pauperized finances remain private and confidential; and honorably and humbly demands

6

again before the court that defendants in these cases pay all court fees and costs and

7

expenditures of said cases, including court and clerk fees . . . . These demands have

8

been stated previously and repeatedly, and the court has chosen not to address them,

9

ignored them in fact.”).
Plaintiff need not disclose his financial condition to proceed with this action.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Plaintiff has two options if he wishes to litigate this case. He must either (1) file a new,

12

complete IFP application disclosing all requested information (the required application is

13

attached to this order)1; or (2) pay the entire filing fee of $400.00 and serve the summons

14

and complaint (and any amendments and attachments), as well as scheduling orders and

15

other documents specified by the Clerk, pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil

16

Procedure. Spitters must complete one of those two options by February 15, 2019, or

17

the complaint will remain dismissed without prejudice and this action will be closed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

18
19

Dated: January 9, 2019
__________________________________
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

The application is also available on the district’s website:
https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/civilforms. The direct link to the application is
https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/filelibrary/15/Application%20to%20Proceed%20In%20For
ma%20Pauperisnon-prisoner.pdf (PDF format) or
https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/filelibrary/763/Application-to-Proceed-In-Forma-Pauperisnon-.docx (MS Word format).
2
1