Nasser v. Jaddou

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE ALIREZA NASSER, 9 Plaintiff, Case No. 24-2081-TL 10 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE UR JADDOU, et al., 12 Defendants.

14 Plaintiff has filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) in the above-entitled action. (Dkt. # 3.) In the IFP application, Plaintiff reports a net monthly income of $850, along with $200 in cash on hand, $3,930 in a checking account, and $1,500 in a savings account. (Id. at 1.) He reports no valuable property or dependents, and incurs monthly expenses of $1,625. (Id. at 2.) Over the past twelve months, he has also received $9,600 from rent, interest, or dividends, and $2,527.47 from other benefits. Plaintiff states that his income is below the poverty level. (Id.) 21 The district court may permit indigent litigants to proceed IFP upon completion of a proper affidavit of indigence. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). “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 he or she seeks to pursue are not frivolous.” Ogunsalu v. Nair, 117 F. App’x 522, 523 (9th Cir. 2004), cert. denied, 544 U.S. 1051 (2005). To meet the first prong of this test, a litigant must show that he or she “cannot because of his [or her] poverty pay or give security for the costs and still be able to provide him[ or her]self and dependents with the necessities of life.”

5 Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948) (internal alterations omitted).

7 Plaintiff’s application omits information necessary for the Court to determine his ability to pay court fees and costs. Specifically, Plaintiff’s application lacks a clear explanation for why available funds cannot be used to pay the filing fee of $405.00. (Dkt. # 3 at 2.) Under these circumstances, Plaintiff should not be authorized to proceed IFP.

11 Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED to show cause by January 6, 2025, why the Court should not recommend his IFP application be denied. Alternatively, Plaintiff may submit an amended IFP application by that date, explaining his circumstances more fully. The Clerk is directed to renote Plaintiff’s IFP application (dkt. # 3) for January 6, 2025, and to send copies of this order to Plaintiff and to the Honorable Tana Lin.

16 Dated this 23rd day of December, 2024.

A 18 MICHELLE L. PETERSON United States Magistrate Judge