Luz N. Ortiz v. John Doe Callers Associated with Telephone Numbers Listed in...
Luz N. Ortiz v. John Doe Callers Associated with Telephone Numbers Listed in...
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------x
LUZ N. ORTIZ,
Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM & ORDER 25-CV-5595(EK)(SDE) -against-
JOHN DOE CALLERS ASSOCIATED WITH TELEPHONE NUMBERS LISTED IN EXHIBIT A,
Defendants.
------------------------------------x ERIC KOMITEE, United States District Judge: Luz N. Ortiz filed this action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991. Proceeding pro se, Plaintiff moves to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 2. For the reasons set forth below, that motion is denied without prejudice. Under
28 U.S.C. § 1914, the filing fee to commence a civil action is $350, with an additional administrative fee of $55, for a total fee of $405. Under
28 U.S.C. § 1915, the Court may waive the filing fee upon finding a plaintiff indigent. Plaintiff’s application claims expenses in excess of income, but lists $10,000 in cash and accounts. ECF No. 2, at 4. Based on this information, the Court is unable to find that Plaintiff is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis. The only defendants named in this action are unknown “callers associated with the telephone numbers listed in Exhibit A.” ECF No. 1. Plaintiff asks the Court to issue subpoenas to T-Mobile USA, Inc. in order to identify the subscribers associated with the listed phone numbers, “so that Plaintiff may
identify and properly serve the Defendants.” ECF No. 1-2, at 1. Plaintiff also requests the Court to “order T-Mobile USA, Inc. to waive any fees associated with producing these records.”
Id. at 2. No subpoena will issue until plaintiff pays the filing fee in this case or is granted in forma pauperis status. Cf. Lockridge v. Progressive Ins., No. 18-CV-814,
2019 WL 807055, at *3 n.3 (W.D.N.Y. Feb. 21, 2019) (“28 U.S.C. § 1914 and § 1915 clarify that no civil action exists until either a plaintiff pays the required filing and miscellaneous fees or a court grants a plaintiff’s motion to proceed without paying those fees . . . .”). And even if plaintiff were to proceed in forma pauperis, that status would “not authorize the court to pay [plaintiff’s] discovery costs.” Akande v. United States Marshal Serv., No. 11-CV-1125,
2018 WL 10667611, at *1 (D. Conn. Aug.
21, 2018) (collecting cases). To proceed with this action, plaintiff must either (1) pay the requisite filing fee to the Clerk of Court, or (2) submit a sufficient long-form in forma pauperis application. If plaintiff fails to do either within fourteen days, this action will be dismissed. The Court certifies pursuant to
28 U.S.C. §1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore denies in forma pauperis status for the purpose of an appeal. Coppedge v. United States,
369 U.S. 438, 444-45(1962). The Clerk of Court is respectfully
directed to mail a copy of this order to plaintiff and to note the mailing on the docket.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Eric Komitee ERIC KOMITEE United States District Judge Dated: December 19, 2025 Brooklyn, New York
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Luz N. Ortiz v. John Doe Callers Associated with Telephone Numbers Listed in Exhibit A
- Status
- Unknown