Bradley Ludtke v. Frank J. Bisignano
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
BRADLEY LUDTKE, Plaintiff, Case No. 26-cv-903-pp v. FRANK J. BISIGNANO, Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYING FILING FEE (DKT. NO. 2)
The plaintiff has filed a complaint seeking judicial review of a final administrative decision denying his claim for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act. Dkt. No. 1. He also filed a motion for leave to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. Dkt. No. 2. The court notes for plaintiff’s counsel that future motions to proceed without prepaying the filing fee must be filed using this court’s Non-Prisoner Request to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying the Filing Fee; the form is available on the court’s website, www.wied.uscourts.gov/forms/all-forms/Social Security.
Federal law requires a person who files a complaint in federal court to pay $405—a filing fee of $350 (28 U.S.C. §1914(a)) and a $55 administrative fee (Judicial Conference of the United States District Court Miscellaneous Fee Schedule Effective the December 1, 2023, #14). To allow the plaintiff to proceed without prepaying the filing fee, the court first must decide whether the plaintiff can pay the fee; if not, it must determine whether the lawsuit is frivolous. 28 U.S.C. §§1915(a) and 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).
Based on the facts in the plaintiff’s affidavit, the court concludes that he does not have the ability to pay the filing fee. The plaintiff’s application indicates that his monthly income is $1,140.88 ($594.88 disability insurance, $546 SNAP benefits). Dkt. No. 2 at 3. The plaintiff’s monthly expenses total $1,375 ($265 utilities, $546 food, $50 laundry/dry-cleaning, $100 transportation, $47 car insurance, $117 property taxes, $250 credit card payments). Id. at 5-6. The plaintiff owns his home, valued at approximately $113,000; he owns a 2003 Honda CRV, worth approximately $1,000; and he has no cash on hand or in a checking or savings account. Id. at 3-4. The plaintiff states, “Our expenses outweigh our income, and our only income is from my full disability benefits and SNAP benefits. My wife and I recently experienced major vehicle problems after our transmission failed, creating additional financial hardship. Although we own our home through the Community Development Block Grant program and do not have a mortgage payment, we do not have any extra funds available to pay the filing fee.” Id. at 6. The plaintiff has demonstrated that he cannot pay the $405 fee.
The next step is to determine whether the case is frivolous. A case is frivolous if there is no arguable basis for relief either in law or in fact. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 31 (1992) (quoting Nietzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Casteel v. Pieschek, 3 F.3d 1050, 1056 (7th Cir. 1993)). A person may obtain district court review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security. 42 U.S.C. §405(g). The district court must uphold the Commissioner’s final decision as long as the Commissioner used the correct legal standards and the decision is supported by substantial evidence. See Roddy v. Astrue, 705 F.3d 631, 636 (7th Cir. 2013).
The plaintiff's complaint indicates that he was denied Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income benefits, that he was and is disabled and unable to work and that the decision of the Commissioner to deny benefits is not supported by substantial evidence and/or is contrary to law and regulation. Dkt. No. 1 at 2. At this early stage in the case, and based on the information in the plaintiff's complaint, the court concludes that there may be a basis in law or in fact for the plaintiffs appeal of the Commissioner’s decision, and that the appeal may have merit, as defined by 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(i).
The court GRANTS the plaintiffs motion for leave to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. Dkt. No. 2.
Dated in Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 22nd day of May, 2026.
BY THE COURT: ss Ge ne, Chief United States District Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.