United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2019

(PC) Gradford v. Tiexiera

(PC) Gradford v. Tiexiera
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided December 27, 2019
(PC) Gradford v. Tiexiera

Trial Court Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WILLIAM J. GRADFORD, Case No.: 1:19-cv-01783-SKO (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 13 v. SHOULD NOT BE DENIED TIEXIERA, et al., (Doc. 2) 15 Defendants. 21-DAY DEADLINE 17 On December 23, 2019, Plaintiff William J. Gradford filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). (Doc. 2.) In his motion, Plaintiff states that he received a $3,000 settlement earlier this year. (Id.) This is more than enough to pay the $400 filing fee in this action; therefore, Plaintiff must show why he is entitled to IFP status.

21 Proceeding “in forma pauperis is a privilege not a right.” Smart v. Heinze, 347 F.2d 114, 116 (9th Cir. 1965). While a party need not be completely destitute to proceed IFP, Adkins v. E.I.

23 DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339-40 (1948), “‘the same even-handed care must be employed to assure that federal funds are not squandered to underwrite, at public expense, either frivolous claims or the remonstrances of a suitor who is financially able, in whole or in material part, to pull his own oar.’” Doe v. Educ. Enrichment Sys., No. 15-cv-2628-MMA-MDD, 2015 27 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173063, *2 (S.D. Cal. 2015) (quoting Temple v. Ellerthorpe, 586 F. Supp. 848, 850 (D.R.I. 1984)). Hence, “the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that the [plaintiff’s] allegation of poverty is untrue.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(A).

2 Plaintiff may have adequate funds to be required to pay the filing fee in full to proceed in this action. Accordingly, within 21 days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff SHALL show cause why his motion to proceed IFP should not be denied, and why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice to refiling with prepayment of the filing fee. Failure to respond to this order will result in dismissal for failure to obey a court order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sheila K. Oberto Dated: December 27, 2019 /s/ .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.