Janelle Garcia and Crosby Garcia, Jr. v. Klamath Falls City Police Dept.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON JANELLE GARCIA and CROSBY GARCIA, JR., Case. No. 1:26-cv-129-MC Plaintiff, ORDER v. KLAMATH FALLS CITY POLICE DEPT., Defendant. _____________________________ MCSHANE, Judge: Pro se plaintiffs filed a Complaint for review of a social security decision. ECF No. 1.

Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). Even assuming plaintiff sought leave to proceed IFP, the Court is unable to make out any claim.

This court has discretion in deciding whether to grant in forma pauperis status. See O'Loughlin v. Doe, 920 F.2d 614, 616 (9th Cir. 1990). To qualify for in forma pauperis status, a civil litigant must demonstrate both that the litigant is unable to pay court fees and that the claims the litigant seeks to pursue are not frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); O'Loughlin, 920 F.2d at 617.

Plaintiffs name the Klamath Falls Police Department as the Defendant. Plaintiffs’ claims are difficult to make out. It appears that Janelle Garcia believes that the Social Security Administration’s denial of her (or her son’s) supplemental security income was in error. The Klamath Falls Police Department, however, as a local law enforcement agency, has no role to play in the Commissioner of Social Security’s determination of Plaintiff’s SSI benefits.

Because Plaintiffs fail to state a claim, this action is DISMISSED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 29th day of January 2026. _____/s/ Michael McShane ______ Michael McShane United States District Judge