PASTUCH v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

Filing 2

OPINION filed. Signed by Judge Anne E. Thompson on 2/23/2017. (mps)

11

!

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

R~CEfVED
1,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

I

\ FEB 23 2017
I

AT B:30

KATHLEEN J. PASTUCH,

WI.

ILL~IA~M"':"':T::""'.~W-AL_S_H_M

'

Plaintiff,

CLERK

\,

Civ. No. 17-tj0989
1

v.

I
!,

OPINION
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
THOMPSON, U.S.D.J.
This matter comes before the Court on the. application filed by Plaintiff fathleen J.
(,

Pastuch ("Plaintiff') to proceed in forma pauperis without prepayment of fees, ~ursuant to 28
'

\

U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF No. 1). Based on Plaintiff's affidavit of indigence, the Cohrt finds that ,
\

Plaintiff qualifies for in forma pauperis status pursuant to 28 U.S. C. § 1915 and will direct that
!
I
\,

the Complaint be filed.

i

In considering an application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court gen~ally conducts
a two-step analysis. See Roman v. Jeffes, 904 F.2d 192, 194 n.1 (3d Cir. 1990).

"
I
~irst,

the Court

I
I'

determines whether the Plaintiff is eligible to proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). l;,To satisfy this
\

initial inquiry, litigants who wish to proceed in forma pauperis must file an applic~tion to do so
\,

which includes an affidavit of indigence that states the individual's total income, aJl assets, and
I,

I'

inability to pay filing fees. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(l); Glenn v. Hayman, 2007 WtL 432974, at
*7 (D.N.J. Jan. 30, 2007). In this case, it appears that Plaintiff has satisfied the firs~ inquiry.
I'

Plaintiff claims that she currently lives in a shelter, has an income of $334 per monhi, and does
I
I,

not have any money in a bank account or with a financial institution. Therefore, th~ Court finds
that she is eligible to proceed in forma pauperis.
1

•

Second, the Court determines whether the Complaint should be dismiksed. A Complaint
may be subject to sua sponte dismissal if the Complaint is. frivolous, fails to

s~te a claim upon
11

.

which relief may be granted, or it seeks money damages from defendants whq are immune from
11

such relief. See Roman, 904 F.2d at 194 n.1; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). "Thf legal standard for
I'

dismissing a complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 191!5(e)(2)(B)(ii) is the
1

11

same as that for dismissing a complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Prodedure 12(b)(6). To
I'
Ii

survive dismissal, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, acceptedI as true, to state a
.
I'

claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Schreane v. Seana, 506 F. App'x

120, 122 (3d Cir.
I

2012) (citations omitted). Here, Plaintiff appeals a final decision of Defendant, the
I
11

I

Commissioner of Social Security. The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's Compla,nt pursuant to 28
II

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), and is not persuaded that sua sponte dismissal of the Gomplaint is
I
11

warranted. For these reasons, the Court will permit Plaintiff's Complaint to be filed without
I'

prepayment of the filing fee pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). An app~opriate order will
I'

follow.

ANNE E. THOMP~ON, U.S.D l.

Dated:

~ ;t-1

T·

I
i

1

2