Kurilla v. BERRYHILL
ORDER Adopting 5 Report and Recommendation Denying 2 Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (SPin)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Case Number 17-11592
Honorable David M. Lawson
Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
Presently before the Court is the report issued on May 18, 2017 by Magistrate Judge Patricia
T. Morris pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), recommending that the Court deny the plaintiff’s
application to proceed in forma pauperis. Although the report stated that the parties to this action
could object to and seek review of the recommendation within fourteen days of service of the report,
no objections have been filed thus far. The parties’ failure to file objections to the report and
recommendation waives any further right to appeal. Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of Teachers Local 231,
829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the failure to object to the magistrate judge’s report
releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140,
149 (1985). However, the Court agrees with the conclusions of the magistrate judge.
As the magistrate judge observed, the plaintiff stated in his financial affidavit that he is not
employed, but he receives income from disability benefits in the amount of $2,010 per month, and
he has on hand $190,000 in cash from the sale of his home. The plaintiff also stated that he owns
two vehicles, a 2007 Jaguar and a 2015 Dodge Ram; that he pays debts of $4,200 per month; that
he has no dependents; and that he has an unspecified amount of credit card debt. The magistrate
judge recommended that the application to proceed in forma pauperis should be denied because the
plaintiff has a large amount of liquid capital available, possesses two valuable motor vehicles, and
has a considerable amount of monthly income from a private disability insurance company, and he
has not demonstrated that, because of his poverty, he is unable to pay the filing fee in this case. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915. Moreover, the Court notes that, after the magistrate judge’s report was issued,
the plaintiff tendered the required filing fee to the Clerk of Court.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation [dkt.
#5] is ADOPTED.
It is further ORDERED that the plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis [dkt.
#2] is DENIED.
s/David M. Lawson
DAVID M. LAWSON
United States District Judge
Dated: July 6, 2017
PROOF OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served
upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first
class U.S. mail on July 6, 2017.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?