Jefferson v. Brennan

Filing 2

ORDER denying 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis signed by Judge Benjamin H. Settle.(TG; cc mailed to plaintiff)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

2
3

JASMIN L. JEFFERSON,

4
5
6

Plaintiff,
v.
MEGAN J. BRENNAN, Postmaster
General,

7

CASE NO. C17-5410 BHS
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO PROCEED IN
FORMA PAUPERIS AND MOTION
TO APPOINT COUNSEL

Defendant.

8
9

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Jasmin L. Jefferson’s (“Jefferson”)

10

motion to proceed in forma pauperis, proposed complaint, and motion to appoint counsel.

11

Dkts. 1, 1-1, 1-2.

12

On May 30, 2017, Jefferson filed the instant motion and proposed complaint.

13

Jefferson asserts that her household income is approximately $1,750 per month with

14

some additional income from child support or alimony and household expenses of

15

approximately $700 per month. Dkt. 1 at 1–2. Jefferson alleges that the postal service

16

denied her reasonable accommodations when she was pregnant. Dkt. 1-1 at 1.

17

The district court may permit indigent litigants to proceed in forma pauperis upon

18

completion of a proper affidavit of indigency. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a); W.D. Wash.

19

Local Rules LCR 3(b). However, the “privilege of pleading in forma pauperis . . . in

20

civil actions for damages should be allowed only in exceptional circumstances.” Wilborn

21

v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328 (9th Cir. 1986). The court has broad discretion in denying

22

ORDER - 1

1

an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Weller v. Dickson, 314 F.2d 598 (9th Cir.

2

1963), cert. denied 375 U.S. 845 (1963).

3

In this case, Jefferson has failed to show exceptional circumstances exist in this

4

civil action for damages. It appears that Jefferson is able to pay the filing fee, which

5

precludes a finding of indigency. Therefore, the Court denies the motion.

6

With regard to the motion to appoint counsel, the Court evaluates both the

7

likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate her claims

8

pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789

9

F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986). At this point, Jefferson appears to be able to articulate

10

her claims and the legal issues are not that complex. Therefore, the Court denies

11

Jefferson’s motion to appoint counsel.

12

Jefferson must pay the filing fee or otherwise respond no later than June 16, 2017.

13

Failure to do so will result in the Clerk dismissing her claims without prejudice for failure

14

to prosecute without further order of the Court.

15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16

Dated this 7th day of June, 2017.

A

17
18

BENJAMIN H. SETTLE
United States District Judge

19
20
21
22

ORDER - 2