1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DANIAL MUHAMMAD, Case No. 25-cv-08265-LJC

8 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO 9 v. WHY APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS SHOULD NOT 10 KAISER PERMANENTE GROUP, INC., et BE DENIED al., 11 Re: Dkt. No. 2 Defendants.

12

13 14 Plaintiff Danial Muhammad, pro se, filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) 15 using the Northern District’s form application. The primary effects of such an application being 16 granted would be to excuse Plaintiff from paying the $405 filing fee for this civil action and that 17 an agent of the Court (typically the U.S. Marshal) would complete service of process on their 18 behalf, if the Court determines that Plaintiff’s Complaint is not subject to dismissal under 28 19 U.S.C § 1915(e)(2)(B). 20 Plaintiff’s IFP application states that he is “unable to pay the costs of this action or give 21 security, and that” he believes he is entitled to relief from being required to prepay the required 22 costs and fees for this action. ECF No. 2. Plaintiff lists his net income as ranging between $3,700 23 to $4,100 per month, and lists his monthly expenses (including car and credit card payments, and 24 expenses for rent, food, utilities, and clothing) as $3,340. Id. at 1-2. He states that he is married 25 and that he contributes $3,800 per month to support his spouse, but also that his spouse works and 26 he and his spouse’s “finances are … separate” as a condition of their marriage. Id. at 2-3. And 27 although Plaintiff checked “No” in response to the question “Do you own or are you buying a 1 home’s estimated market value ($950,000) and mortgage payment ($2,300). /d. at 3. Plaintiff 2 also included rent ($1,000) in his list of monthly expenses. □□□ 3 Although “[o]ne need not be absolutely destitute to obtain benefits of the in forma pauperis 4 statute ... a plaintiff seeking IFP status must allege poverty ‘with some particularity, definiteness 5 and certainty.”” Escobedo v. Applebees,

(9th Cir. 2015) (quoting United 6 States v. McQuade,

(9th Cir. 1981)). Based on the information provided, the 7 || Court cannot ascertain whether Plaintiff lacks sufficient funds to qualify for IFP status: does he 8 || own anearly one-million-dollar home? Does he pay rent, pay mortgage, or pay both? Support his 9 spouse financially or keep his finances separate? If he is providing $3,800 per month to his 10 spouse, does he have additional, undisclosed sources of income to cover his other monthly 11 expenses? Plaintiff's somewhat contradictory—and potentially incomplete—financial information 12 || does not show, with “particularity, definiteness, and certainty,” that he is not able to pay the $405 5 13 filing fee “and still afford the necessities of life.” Escobedo,

. 14 Plaintiff is accordingly ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why his IFP application should 3 15 not be denied by filing, no later than November 21, 2025, a supplemental application or additional a 16 || declaration clearly listing his monthly expenses and sources of income, or by paying the filing fee 3 17 by the same deadline. Failure to respond to this Order or pay the filing fee may result in the 18 || undersigned issuing a report and recommendation recommending dismissal of this case for failure 19 || to prosecute, failure to comply with a court order, and failure to pay the filing fee. 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 Dated: November 7, 2025 22 23 Unit ates Magistrate Judge 25 26 27 28