Collins v. The United States Navy

Filing 3

ORDER Denying 2 Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. The Court denies Plaintiff's motion to proceed IFP and dismisses this action without prejudice for failure to prepay the $400 filing fee required by 28 U.S.C. § 1 914(a). Plaintiff may re-open his case by paying the $400 statutory and administrative filing fee within fourteen (14) days from the date this Orderis filed. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 12/13/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(rmc) (sjt).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

Case No.: 17cv2451-MMA (BGS)

JOE E. III: COLLINS,
Plaintiff,

12
13

v.

14

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS

UNITED STATES NAVY,

15

Defendant.

[Doc. No. 2]

16
17
18

On December 7, 2017, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed this action against the

19

United States Navy. See Doc. No. 1. Plaintiff simultaneously filed a motion to proceed

20

in forma pauperis (“IFP”). See Doc. No. 2. For the reasons set forth below, the Court

21

DENIES Plaintiff’s motion to proceed IFP.

22
23

DISCUSSION
All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a district court of the

24

United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of

25

$400. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). An action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to

26

prepay the entire fee only if he is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

27

1915(a). See Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). “To proceed in

28

forma pauperis is a privilege not a right.” Smart v. Heinze, 347 F.2d 114, 116 (9th Cir.
1
17cv2451-MMA (BGS)

1

1965). A party need not be completely destitute to proceed in forma pauperis. Adkins v.

2

E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339–40 (1948). But “the same even-

3

handed care must be employed to assure that federal funds are not squandered to

4

underwrite, at public expense, either frivolous claims or the remonstrances of a suitor

5

who is financially able, in whole or in material part, to pull his own oar.” Temple v.

6

Ellerthorpe, 586 F. Supp. 848, 850 (D.R.I. 1984).

7

Plaintiff failed to sign the affidavit in support of his IFP application, and therefore

8

has not certified under penalty of perjury that he is unable to pay the costs associated with

9

initiating this action. This alone is sufficient grounds to deny Plaintiff’s application.

10

Furthermore, Plaintiff indicates on the application that his average monthly income is

11

approximately $3,700, but his total monthly expenses are $90. As such, it does not

12

appear that Plaintiff is entitled to the relief he requests.

13
14

CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion to proceed IFP and

15

DISMISSES this action without prejudice for failure to prepay the $400 filing fee

16

required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). Plaintiff may re-open his case by paying the $400

17

statutory and administrative filing fee within fourteen (14) days from the date this Order

18

is filed. If Plaintiff fails to pay the $400 filing fee within 14 days, this action will remain

19

dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), and without further Order

20

of the Court.

21
22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: December 13, 2017

_______________________________________
HON. MICHAEL M. ANELLO
United States District Judge

24
25
26
27
28
2
17cv2451-MMA (BGS)