Free Order - District Court of California - California


File Size: 108.6 kB
Pages: 2
Date: August 12, 2008
File Format: PDF
State: California
Category: District Court of California
Author: unknown
Word Count: 315 Words, 2,021 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cand/205782/4.pdf

Download Order - District Court of California ( 108.6 kB)


Preview Order - District Court of California
Case 3:08-cv-03683-BZ

Document 4

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Defendant(s). 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff has applied to proceed in forma pauperis. Having reviewed the application, I find that I cannot properly evaluate it because it contains conflicting or incomplete financial information. In her application, plaintiff's stated monthly expenses exceed $3,000, though she may have made an error in listing her clothing expenses. In addition, plaintiff contributes v. TENDERLOIN NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT, DELORES SELTZER Plaintiff(s), ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

No.

C08-03683 BZ

ORDER REQUIRING AMENDED APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

$3,000 yearly in support of two children. However, she does not have a monthly income, bank account, or any other assets. It is thus unclear how plaintiff covers her monthly expenses. 1

Case 3:08-cv-03683-BZ

Document 4

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

These conflicting and incomplete responses preclude me from meaningfully evaluating plaintiff's eligibility to proceed in forma pauperis. For these reasons, and for good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that by no later than Monday, September 8, 2008, plaintiff must either submit an amended application or pay the ordinary filing fee and proceed accordingly. Failure

to take one of these actions by that date will result in dismissal of this action without prejudice. Any amended

application should address the questions raised in this Order. Plaintiff is reminded that if she chooses to pay the filing fee rather than amend her application, she is responsible for serving her complaint and any amendments or attachments, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4. Dated: August 12, 2007 Bernard Zimmerman United States Magistrate Judge
G:\BZALL\-BZCASES\SELTZER V TENDERLOIN\ORDER.DENY.IN.FORM.PAUP.wpd

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2