Houston v. Convergent Outsourcing Inc

Filing 3

ORDER denying 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; plaintiff shall have 30 days from the date of this order to correct this deficiency, signed by Hon. James P. Donohue. (SWT) (cc: Plaintiff via USPS with standard IFP form)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 9 TIERRA HOUSTON, 10 Plaintiff, 11 12 Case No. C17-883-RSL ORDER DENYING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS v. CONVERGENT OUTSOURCING, INC., 13 Defendant. 14 Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis 15 16 (“IFP”) in the above-entitled action. Dkt. 1. After careful consideration of the application, the 17 governing law, and the balance of the record, the Court ORDERS as follows: (1) 18 Plaintiff’s application to proceed IFP (Dkt. 1) is DENIED. Plaintiff’s 19 application is deficient because she failed to comply with LCR 3(b). Specifically, plaintiff 20 failed to use the proper IFP application form approved for use in this district. (2) 21 Plaintiff is GRANTED LEAVE TO AMEND, and shall have 30 days from the 22 date of this Order to correct this deficiency. Plaintiff is advised that this case may be subject to 23 dismissal if she does not respond to this Order or fails to correct this deficiency. 24 // 25 // 26 ORDER PAGE - 1 1 2 3 (3) The Clerk is directed to send plaintiff a blank copy of the Court’s IFP application, a standard written consent for payment of costs form, and a copy of this Order. DATED this 13th day of June, 2017. A 4 5 JAMES P. DONOHUE Chief United States Magistrate Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ORDER PAGE - 2

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?