Howell v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS denying 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis and RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff be given ten (10) days from the date of the adoption of this Report and Recommendation to pay the appropriate filing fee. Objections to R&R due by 6/9/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson on 5/26/2017. (ew)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WILLIAM J. HOWELL, SR.
Civil Action 2:17-cv-409
Judge Algenon L. Marbley
Magistrate Judge Jolson
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On May 12, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). (Doc. 1). As previously explained (See Doc. 2), in Adkins v. E.I. DuPont
de Nemours & Co., Inc., 335 U.S. 331 (1948), the Supreme Court set forth the legal standard
applicable to a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. An affidavit of poverty is sufficient if it
reflects that the plaintiff cannot pay the Court’s filing fee without depriving himself and his
dependents the “necessities of life.” Id. at 339 (internal quotation marks omitted). Upon review
of Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court noted he had filed a shortform application, and thus could not determine whether a one-time payment of the Court’s filing
fee would render Plaintiff unable to provide for himself and his dependents. (See Doc. 2).
Consequently, on May 15, 2017, the Court ordered Plaintiff to complete the long-form
application within ten days. (Id.).
Ten days have passed and Plaintiff has failed to submit a long-form application in
accordance with the Court’s May 15, 2017 Order. Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that
Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 1) be denied. Further, it is
RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff be given ten (10) days from the date of adoption of this Report
and Recommendation to pay the appropriate filing fee.
Procedure on Objections
If any party objects to this Report and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen
(14) days of the date of this Report, file and serve on all parties written objections to those
specific proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made, together with
supporting authority for the objection(s).
A Judge of this Court shall make a de novo
determination of those portions of the Report or specified proposed findings or recommendations
to which objection is made. Upon proper objections, a Judge of this Court may accept, reject, or
modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made herein, may receive further
evidence or may recommit this matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C.
The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to the Report and
Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to have the District Judge review the Report
and Recommendation de novo, and also operates as a waiver of the right to appeal the decision of
the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140
(1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: May 26, 2017
/s/ Kimberly A. Jolson
KIMBERLY A. JOLSON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?