(PS) Plousha v. Aspen Park Apartments

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DAYLAN LYDELL PLOUSHA, Case No. 2:25-cv-00262-TLN-CSK 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 v. 14 ARDEN PARK APARTMENTS, (ECF Nos. 1, 2) 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff Daylan Lydell Plousha is representing himself in this action and seeks 18 leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.1 (ECF No. 2.) 19 For the reasons that follow, the Court recommends Plaintiff’s IFP application be denied, 20 and the Complaint be dismissed without leave to amend. 21 I. MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 22 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) provides that the court may authorize the commencement, 23 prosecution or defense of any suit without prepayment of fees or security “by a person 24 who submits an affidavit stating the person is “unable to pay such fees or give security 25 therefor.” This affidavit is to include, among other things, a statement of all assets the 26 person possesses. Id. The IFP statute does not itself define what constitutes insufficient 27 1 …