Pacheco v. 30th Precinct

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK RODOLFO PACHECO, Plaintiff, 19-CV-11915 (CM) -against- ORDER DIRECTING PAYMENT OF FEE OR AMENDED IFP APPLICATION 3OTH PRECINCT, et al., Defendants.

COLLEEN McMAHON, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff brings this action pro se. To proceed with a civil action in this Court, a plaintiff must either pay $400.00 in fees – a $350.00 filing fee plus a $50.00 administrative fee – or, to request permission to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), that is, without prepayment of fees, submit a signed IFP application. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914, 1915.

Plaintiff submitted an IFP application, but his responses do not establish that he is unable to pay the filing fees. Plaintiff indicates that he is not employed, but he fails to answer the questions concerning his income and financial situation. Because Plaintiff fails to supply sufficient information about his income, expenses, and any assets he may have, the Court is unable to conclude that he lacks sufficient funds to pay the relevant fees for this action.

Accordingly, within thirty days of the date of this order, Plaintiff must either pay the $400.00 in fees or submit an amended IFP application. If Plaintiff submits the amended IFP application, it should be labeled with docket number 19-CV-11915 (CM), and address the deficiencies indicated above by providing facts establishing that he is unable to pay the relevant fees. Plaintiff must answer each question on the IFP application, state all sources of income and all monthly expenses, and describe how he is able to support himself. If the Court grants the amended IFP application, Plaintiff will be permitted to proceed without prepayment of fees. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)C1).

The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff and note service on the docket. If Plaintiff complies with this order, the case shall be processed in accordance with the procedures of the Clerk’s Office. If Plaintiff fails to comply with this order within the time allowed, the action will be dismissed.

The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that appellant demonstrates good faith when seeking review of a nonfrivolous issue).

SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 16, 2020 New York, New York hie. Iu Chief United States District Judge