UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 16, 2011
HSBC BANK U.S.A.,
DORA A. CARBAJAL,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Anthony J. BattagliaU.S. District Judge
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS [DOC. NO. 2]
On April 14, 2011, Dora A. Carbajal, a non-prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a Notice of Removal of case number 37-2010-00032112-CL-UD-SC from Superior Court of California, County of San Diego, to this Court [Doc. No. 1], along with a Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. No. 2]. Defendant Carbajal submitted a declaration in support of a request to proceed in forma pauperis in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) and Local Rule 3.2(a).
The Court finds that the Defendant's declaration of inability to pay costs or give security is insufficient to permit Defendant to proceed in forma pauperis. Permission to file a petition for writ of mandamus in forma pauperis will not be granted unless there is some merit in the petition. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915. Although one need not be absolutely destitute to obtain benefits of statute dealing with proceedings in forma pauperis in federal courts, a motion to proceed in forma pauperis must state facts as to affiant's poverty with some particularity, definiteness and certainty. See 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915; Jefferson v. U.S., 277 F. 2d 723 (9th Cir. 1960). The Defendant's motion fails to state with particularity, definiteness and certainty that such funds are insufficient to make such expenses and pay under 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) because of the following reasons:
* Defendant states current employment with wages of $1,800.00 per month.
* Defendant has a primary residence worth $270,000.
* Defendant owns a 2006 Hyundai Sonata outright.
* Defendant's expenses of "utilities, water, food, gas and any other expenses that may occur" are not stated with particularity.
* Defendant has noted no debts or obligations except litigation.
It is under the Court's discretion to grant or deny permission to proceed in forma pauperis based on the Defendant's claim. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Without further evidence, the Court lacks specific facts to find that the Defendant is not able to pay the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). In light of this information, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Carbajal's Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED and the Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice. Pursuant to this Order, however, Defendant is granted 30 days leave to pay the $350 filing fee required to maintain this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1914, or to submit additional documentation regarding the Defendant's economic status. IF PLAINTIFF CHOOSES TO FILE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING HER POVERTY, SHE MUST ATTACH A COPY OF THIS ORDER.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.