1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 BRENTON LIPSCOMB, Case No.: 1:24-cv-01308-JLT-CDB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 13 v. (Docs. 2, 6) 14 EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, et al., 15 Defendants.

16 17 Background 18 Plaintiff Brenton Lipscomb (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, initiated four actions with the 19 filing of four separate complaints and associated applications to proceed in forma pauperis on 20 October 25, 2024. (Docs. 1, 2). See Case Numbers: 1:24-cv-01305-JLT-CDB (“Action 21 1305”), 1:24-cv-01306-CDB (“Action 1306”), 1:24-cv-01307-CDB (“Action 1307”), and 1:24- 22 cv-01308-JLT-CDB (“Action 1308”) (collectively, “Actions 1305-1308”). Plaintiff’s 23 complaints in these actions allege substantially similar facts and nearly identical causes of 24 action against related defendants. (See Doc. 1). On November 26, 2024, the undersigned 25 entered Findings and Recommendations that are now pending with the assigned district judge 26 to dismiss Action 1305, Action 1306, and Action 1307 without leave to amend as duplicative of 27 the instant action and allow Action 1308 to proceed as the action encompassing the broadest set of allegations applicable to all defendants and claims. (Action 1305, Doc. 7); (Action 1306, 1 Doc. 8); (Action 1307, Doc. 8). 2 Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis 3 To proceed in court without prepayment of the filing fee, a plaintiff must submit an 4 affidavit demonstrating that he “is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.” 28 U.S.C. 5 § 1915(a)(1). The right to proceed without prepayment of fees in a civil case is a privilege and 6 not a right. Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, Unit II Men’s Advisory Council,

194, 198 n.2 (1993); see Franklin v. Murphy,

(9th Cir. 1984) (“permission 8 to proceed in forma pauperis is itself a matter of privilege and not right; denial of in forma 9 pauperis does not violate the applicant’s right to due process”), abrogated on other grounds, 10 Neitzke v. Williams,

(1989). A plaintiff need not be absolutely destitute to 11 proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and the application is sufficient if it states that due to 12 poverty, the applicant is unable to pay the costs and still be able to provide himself and his 13 dependents with the necessities of life. Adkins v. E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co.,

331, 339 (1948). Whether to grant or deny an application to proceed without prepayment of 15 fees is an exercise of the district court’s discretion. See Escobedo v. Applebees,

, 16 1236 (9th Cir. 2015). 17 Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee in any of the named actions and, instead, applied to 18 proceed IFP pursuant to

. (Actions 1305-1308, Doc. 2). On October 30, 19 2024, because Plaintiff’s applications demonstrated that his income and resources could be 20 above the poverty threshold and the information provided was insufficient for the Court to 21 determine whether he is entitled to proceed without prepayment of fees in this action, the Court 22 ordered Plaintiff to file a long-form IFP application. (Actions 1305-1308, Doc. 4). On 23 November 20, 2024, Plaintiff filed identical long-form IFP applications in the named actions. 24 (Actions 1305-1308, Doc. 6). On November 27, 2024, the Court entered order directing 25 Plaintiff to make a supplemental filing within 14 days of entry of the order explaining 26 discrepancies in his initial and long-form applications. (Doc. 7). Specifically, the Court noted 27 Plaintiff’s applications demonstrate that he is not living in poverty as he is able to afford 1 benefits and purportedly having no money in any bank accounts or in any other financial 2 institution. (Id. at 3). 3 In a supplemental filing dated December 9, 2024, Plaintiff represents the discrepancies in 4 his applications to proceed IFP. (Doc. 8). Therein, Plaintiff represents that his “current life 5 necessity expenses [of $4,421.50] have been graciously paid by his mother in a [contingent] 6 loan form to ensure [P]laintiff does not become homeless, more indebted, and has the minimal 7 to survive given [P]laintiff’s economic crisis.” (Id. ¶ 7). “If his mother cannot afford being a 8 resource for the new month, the [P]laintiff will be destitute for the month.” (Id. ¶ 9). Plaintiff 9 represents that he no longer receives unemployment benefits, which was last received on or 10 about February 2024. (Id. ¶ 10). Plaintiff represents that he does not report any expected or 11 major changes to his monthly income or expenses, and that he is continuing to apply for jobs. 12 (Id.). Plaintiff represents that his “financial obligation and expenses are locked and fixed for 13 the next 12 months.” (Id.). Plaintiff represents “it is clear the [P]laintiff is not able to afford to 14 proceed in court with a filing fee and needs to proceed in forma pauperis.” (Id.). 15 The Court finds Plaintiff has made the showing required by § 1915, and the request to 16 proceed in forma pauperis shall be granted. 17 As to the status of the complaint, Plaintiff is advised that pursuant to

1915(e)(2), the Court must conduct an initial review of a pro se complaint where the plaintiff 19 proceeds in forma pauperis to determine whether it is legally sufficient under the applicable 20 pleading standards. The Court must dismiss a complaint, or portion thereof, if the Court 21 determines that the complaint is legally frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which 22 relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such 23 relief.

(e)(2). If the Court determines that the complaint fails to state a claim, 24 leave to amend may be granted to the extent that the deficiencies in the complaint can be cured 25 by amendment. 26 Plaintiff’s complaint will be screened in due course. If appropriate after the case has 27 been screened, the Clerk of the Court will provide Plaintiff with the requisite forms and 1 | Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 2 Conclusion and Order 3 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Docs. 2, 6), for good cause appearing, is GRANTED. 5 | IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _ December 17, 2024 | nnd Rr 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28