(PS) Favis v. O-Film Global (HK) Trading Limited

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA STEPHEN FAVIS, No. 2:25-cv-1082-DAD-SCR 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS O-FILM GLOBAL (HK) TRADING LIMITED, A CORPORATION UNDER THE LAWS OF HONG KONG, et al., 16 Defendants.

18 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this matter, which is accordingly referred to the undersigned by Local Rule 302(c)(21). Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and the affidavit required by that statute. ECF No. 2; see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) (authorizing the commencement of an action “without prepayment of fees or security” by a person that is unable to pay such fees).

23 The motion makes an insufficient showing to proceed IFP. The Ninth Circuit has recognized “[o]ne need not be absolutely destitute to obtain benefits” of the IFP statute. Esobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015) (citation omitted). However, “a plaintiff seeking IFP status must allege poverty with some particularity, definiteness, and certainty.” Id. (internal citation and quotation omitted).

28 //// 1 The current application contains a meaningful omission. Plaintiff states that he receives $3,649 in income from real property, yet he lists no assets. ECF No. 2 at 1-2. It seems implausible that Plaintiff receives $3,649 in income from real property yet lists no real property as an asset.

5 Moreover, it appears that Plaintiff could pay the filing fee in this case. Plaintiff states his monthly expenses are $2,319, so his monthly income exceeds his monthly expenses by $1,330.

7 Id. at 4-5. The filing fee is only $405.

8 Plaintiff does state in the application that he is in bankruptcy proceedings and references Case No. 25-20501. Id. at 5. A court may independently take judicial notice of facts that are not subject to reasonable dispute because they can be “accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” Fed. R. Evid. §§ 201(b)(2), (c). The Court takes judicial notice of Case No. 25-20501, filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California on February 4, 2025.

14 Plaintiff listed $4 million worth of real property among his assets in that case. Summary Assets and Liabilities for Non-Individuals at 1, In re Stephen Donald Favis (No. 25-20501), ECF No.27 at 1. Plaintiff also reported owning three vehicles. Id. at 3-4. This income and these assets were reported on bankruptcy schedules and signed under penalty of perjury, yet all were omitted from the motion to proceed IFP in this case.

19 Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis fails to demonstrate any financial burden or inability to pay filing fees in this action.

21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 22 1. Plaintiff’s application to proceed IFP (ECF No. 2) is DENIED.

23 2. Plaintiff shall pay the filing fee within 30 days of the date of this Order.

24 3. Alternatively, Plaintiff may file, within 30 days, a renewed application to proceed IFP to 25 address the deficiencies set forth herein.

26 //// //// //// ] 4. If Plaintiff does not pay the filing fee or file a renewed motion for IFP within 30 days, the 2 Court will recommend that this action claims be DISMISSED.

3 || DATED: August 29, 2025 6 SEAN C. RIORDAN 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1]