Mitchell, Stan v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc. et al

Filing 3

ORDER taking complaint under advisement for screening. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peter A. Oppeneer on 2/11/2013. (elc),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
STAN R. MITCHELL,
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER
13-cv-97-bbc

SANTANDER CONSUMER USA, INC.
and CEDRIC GAUSE,
Defendants.
Plaintiff Stan Mitchell, a resident of Raleigh, North Carolina has filed a lawsuitrlleging
1

that defendants violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Plaintiff has asked for~eave to
I

proceed in Jonna pauperis and has supported his request with an affidavit of indigen~. The
I

standard for determining whether plaintiff qualifies for indigent status is the

•

followin~:

From plaintiff's annual gross income, the court subtracts $3700

I

f~r

each

dependent excluding the plaintiff.

•

If the balance is less than $16,000, the plaintiff may proceed withtut any

prepayment of fees and costs.

•

.

If the balance is greater than $16,000 but less than $32,000, the plaint~ff must
!

prepay half the fees and costs.
i

•

If the balance is greater than $32,000, the plaintiff must prepay all fees arid costs.
I

•

Substantial assets or debts require individual consideration.
I

In this case, plaintiff has no dependents. He receives $200 per month in incoxpe from
i

his job at Regal Theaters. Plaintiff's annual income of $2,400 is well below the thre~hold to
I

qualify for indigent status. Therefore, plaintiff can proceed without any prepayment of fees or
costs.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Stan Mitchell's complaint is taker under
i

advisement. As soon as the court's calendar permits, plaintiff's complaint will be ~reened
I
I

pursuant to 28 U.S.c. § 1915 to determine whether the case must be dismissed eitheribecause
I

the complaint is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be gramted or
!
,

seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. Plaintiff will be
I
!

notified promptly when such a decision has been made. In the meantime, if plaintiff heeds to

I

communicate with the court about this case, he should be sure to write the case numb~r shown
above on his communication.
Entered this l(...f-t"

day of February, 2013.
BY THE COURT:

a+...£.LO~i L._

PETER OPPENEE
Magistrate Judge

2