Bovdyr v. Cozza
Filing
9
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO COMPLY WITH COURT'S ORDER AND DECLINING 7 TO ADOPT REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Signed by Judge Mary K. Dimke. (Attachments: # 1 Copy of Order Denying Application to Proceed In forma Pauperis with Leave to Renew) (AY, Case Administrator) (Service of Notice on parties not registered as users of the Court CM/ECF system accomplished via USPS mail.)
Case 2:22-cv-00022-MKD
ECF No. 9
filed 05/09/22
PageID.26 Page 1 of 3
1
2
FILED IN THE
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
3
May 09, 2022
SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
7
VALENTIN BOVDYR,
Plaintiff,
8
9
10
v.
MATTHEW COZZA,
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF
TO COMPLY WITH COURT’S
FEBRUARY 18, 2022 ORDER AND
DECLINING TO ADOPT REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION
Defendant.
11
12
No. 2:22-cv-00022-MKD
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Goeke’s March 25, 2022 Report and
13
Recommendation, ECF No. 7, recommending that, due to Plaintiff’s failure to pay
14
the filing fee or submit a properly completed Application to Proceed In Forma
15
Pauperis (IFP application), this Court 1) dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint without
16
prejudice; and 2) Plaintiff be required to provide notice of the dismissal to all
17
18
Defendant(s) he served. Plaintiff filed an objection to Report and
Recommendation, stating he believed he did not need to include his spouse’s
19
income in the IFP application. ECF No. 8.
20
ORDER - 1
Case 2:22-cv-00022-MKD
ECF No. 9
filed 05/09/22
PageID.27 Page 2 of 3
1
After reviewing the Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff’s objection, and
2
relevant authorities, the Court directs that Plaintiff supplement his IFP application
3
consistent with the Court’s February 18, 2022 Order within 14 days. There are
4
multiple deficiencies in Plaintiff’s IFP application. An affidavit in support of
5
an IFP application is sufficient when it alleges that the affiant cannot pay the court
6
costs and still afford the necessities of life. Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours &
7
Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339, 69 S.Ct. 85, 93 L.Ed. 43 (1948). When analyzing an IFP
8
application, a Court may consider a plaintiff’s spouse’s income when the spouse’s
9
funds are available to the plaintiff. See Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226,
10
1236 (9th Cir. 2015) (quoting Lee v. McDonald’s Corp., 231 F.3d 456, 459 (8th
11
Cir. 2000)). Plaintiff indicated that his spouse’s income is available to him to pay
12
household expenses, but has not provided his spouse’s income, nor has he provided
13
any specific information about the costs of his necessities of life. See ECF Nos. 2,
14
4. Plaintiff also did not indicate whether he is or has been a party to a lawsuit, not
15
including this lawsuit, in the last 10 years. See ECF Nos. 2, 4. If he has, Plaintiff
16
is required to provide, but has not yet provided, the required case number, court,
17
type of case, names of parties, and information regarding whether the case is still
18
pending or how it concluded. See ECF Nos. 2, 4.
19
20
While Plaintiff has already been given the opportunity to submit a new and
properly completed IFP application, ECF No. 4, Plaintiff argues he did not
ORDER - 2
Case 2:22-cv-00022-MKD
ECF No. 9
filed 05/09/22
PageID.28 Page 3 of 3
1
understand that he was required to provide information on other members of his
2
household, ECF No. 8. Courts are to make reasonable allowances
3
for pro se litigants and are to construe pro se papers and pleadings
4
liberally. McCabe v. Arave, 827 F.2d 634, 640 n.6 (9th Cir. 1987). Given
5
Plaintiff’s reported misunderstanding and his timely objection to the Report and
6
Recommendation, the Court will allow Plaintiff another opportunity to file a
7
complete IFP application.
8
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
9
1. The Court declines to adopt the Report and Recommendation.
10
2. Within fourteen (14) days of this Order, Plaintiff shall submit a new and
11
properly completed application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the
12
full filing fee.
13
IT IS SO ORDERED. The Clerk’s Office is directed to enter this Order
14
and provide copies to counsel and pro se Plaintiff. The Clerk’s Office is directed
15
to include a copy of the Court’s February 18, 2022, ECF No. 4, with the copies
16
provided to the pro se Plaintiff.
17
DATED May 9, 2022.
s/Mary K. Dimke
MARY K. DIMKE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
18
19
20
ORDER - 3
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?