Ruhe v. Krall et al

Filing 6

ORDER (1) GRANTING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN DISTRICT COURT WITHOUT PREPAYING FEES OR COSTS, AND (2) DIRECTING SERVICE OF THE COMPLAINT re #3 - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON on 1/19/2023. (eta)

Case 1:22-cv-00555-DKW-RT Document 6 Filed 01/19/23 Page 1 of 6

PageID.19

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAI‘I
RICHARD RUHE,

Case No. 22-cv-00555-DKW-RT
ORDER (1) GRANTING
APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN
DISTRICT COURT WITHOUT
PREPAYING FEES OR COSTS,
AND (2) DIRECTING SERVICE OF
THE COMPLAINT1

Plaintiff,
v.
FRANK KRALL and
MARIA KRALL,
Defendants.

On January 3, 2023, Plaintiff Richard J. Ruhe, proceeding pro se, filed a
Complaint against Frank and Maria Krall, alleging several claims, including
tortious interference with parental rights, slander, and negligent and intentional
inflictions of emotional distress. Dkt. No. 1. Ruhe has also filed an application to
proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP Application”). Dkt. No. 3.
IFP Application
Federal courts can authorize the commencement of any suit without
prepayment of fees or security by a person who submits an affidavit that
demonstrates an inability to pay. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). While

1

The Court finds these matters suitable for disposition without a hearing pursuant to Local Rule
7.1(c).
1

Case 1:22-cv-00555-DKW-RT Document 6 Filed 01/19/23 Page 2 of 6

PageID.20

Section 1915(a) does not require a litigant to demonstrate absolute destitution,
Adkins v. E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948), the applicant
must nonetheless show that she is “unable to pay such fees or give security
therefor.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).
Here, Ruhe has made the required showing under Section 1915(a). In his
IFP Application, Ruhe alleges he is unemployed and receives $1,300 in
unemployment benefits per month. See Dkt. No. 3 at 1. He has $500 in checking
and savings, owns only an automobile worth $3,000, and owes $25,000 in loans.
Id. at 2. His rent and transportation costs total $1,695 per month, exceeding his
monthly unemployment income by $395. See id. He also supports his minor
daughter, Calliope Ruhe. 2 Id.
The Court finds that these financial circumstances sufficiently demonstrate
Ruhe’s inability to pay the costs and fees associated with litigation in federal court.
Ruhe’s income puts him under the poverty guideline for a two-person household in
Hawaii,3 and he has alleged under penalty of perjury and with particularity that he
is “unable to pay the costs of these proceedings” while still being able to afford the
necessities of life. See Adkins, 335 U.S. at 339; Escobedo, 787 F.3d at 1234–36.

How Ruhe manages the significant monthly deficit evident in his IFP Application is unclear.
See HHS Poverty Guidelines for 2023, https://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty-guidelines (last visited Jan.
18, 2023) (stating that the poverty guideline for a two-person household in Hawaii is $22,680 per
year or $1,890 per month).
2

3

2

Case 1:22-cv-00555-DKW-RT Document 6 Filed 01/19/23 Page 3 of 6

PageID.21

In addition, Ruhe has insufficient assets to provide security. Thus, the Court
GRANTS the IFP Application, Dkt. No. 3.
Service
Because Ruhe has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and
because his claims have not been dismissed, the Court finds that service of the
summons and Complaint is appropriate. 4 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3). To facilitate
service, the Court ORDERS as follows:
1.

For each of the two (2) named Defendants, the Clerk’s Office is
directed to send to Plaintiff: one copy of the Complaint, Dkt. No. 1;
one summons; one USM-285 form; one Notice of Lawsuit and
Request for Waiver of Service of Summons form (AO 398); two (2)
Waiver of Service of Summons forms (AO 399); an instruction sheet;
and a copy of this Order. The Clerk shall also send a copy of this
Order to the U.S. Marshal.

2.

For each of these named Defendants, Plaintiff shall complete the
forms as directed and submit the following documents to the U.S.
Marshal in Honolulu, Hawaiʻi: a completed USM-285 form; a copy of

4

The Court subjects each civil action commenced pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) to mandatory
screening and can order the dismissal of any claims it finds “frivolous, malicious, failing to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeking monetary relief from a defendant immune
from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). At this initial stage of the proceedings, and
without any responsive pleading from Defendants, the Court has screened the Complaint and
finds service of the same to be appropriate.
3

Case 1:22-cv-00555-DKW-RT Document 6 Filed 01/19/23 Page 4 of 6

PageID.22

the Complaint; the summons; a completed Notice of Lawsuit and
Request for Waiver of Service of Summons form (AO 398); and two
(2) completed Waiver of Service of Summons forms (AO 399).
3.

Upon receipt of these documents from Plaintiff, the U.S. Marshal
shall mail to each Defendant: a copy of the Complaint; a completed
Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service form (AO 398);
and two (2) completed Waiver of Service of Summons forms (AO
399), as directed by Plaintiff without payment of costs. See Fed. R.
Civ. P. 4(c)(3).

4.

The U.S. Marshal shall retain the summons and a copy of the
Complaint. For each Defendant, the U.S. Marshal shall also file a
returned Waiver of Service of Summons form as well as any Waiver
of Service of Summons form that is returned as undeliverable, as soon
as it is received.

5.

If a Defendant does not return a Waiver of Service of Summons form
within sixty days from the date that such forms are mailed, the U.S.
Marshal shall:
a.

Personally serve such Defendant pursuant to Rule 4 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 566(c).

4

Case 1:22-cv-00555-DKW-RT Document 6 Filed 01/19/23 Page 5 of 6

b.

PageID.23

Within ten days after personal service is effected, file the return
of service for such Defendant, along with evidence of any
attempts to secure a waiver of service of summons and of the
costs subsequently incurred in effecting service. Said costs
shall be enumerated on the USM-285 form and shall include the
costs incurred by the U.S. Marshal’s office in photocopying
additional copies of the summons and the Complaint and for
preparing new USM-285 forms, if required. Costs of service
will be taxed against the personally served Defendant in
accordance with the provisions of Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 4(d)(2).

6.

If Ruhe does not wish to use the U.S. Marshal for service, as outlined
above, he may serve Defendants on his own, in compliance with Rule
4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

7.

Ruhe is cautioned that if he fails to comply with this Order and his
non-compliance prevents timely and proper service as set forth in
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), this action is subject to
dismissal for failure to serve.

8.

After service of the summons and Complaint, whether accomplished
on his own or with the services of the U.S. Marshal, Ruhe must serve
5

Case 1:22-cv-00555-DKW-RT Document 6 Filed 01/19/23 Page 6 of 6

PageID.24

on Defendants or, if applicable, Defendants’ attorneys, a copy of all
further documents he submits to the Court. The U.S. Marshal is not
responsible for serving these documents on Plaintiff’s behalf. Ruhe
shall include, with any original paper filed with the Clerk of Court, a
certificate stating the date that a copy of the document was served on
Defendants or Defendants’ counsel, and the manner in which service
was accomplished. Any paper received by a District or Magistrate
Judge that has not been filed with the Clerk of Court or that does not
include a certificate of service will be disregarded.
9.

Ruhe is further notified that he must comply with the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure and the Local Rules for the District of Hawaiʻi
throughout all proceedings in this Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 19, 2023 at Honolulu, Hawai‘i.

___________________________
Derrick K. Watson
Chief United States District Judge

__________________________________________________________________
Richard Ruhe v. Frank Krall, et al; Civil No. 22-00555 DKW-RT; ORDER (1)
GRANTING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN DISTRICT COURT
WITHOUT PREPAYING FEES OR COSTS, AND (2) DIRECTING
SERVICE OF THE COMPLAINT
6