Negrete
Negrete v. Luman
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Juan Hernandez Negrete appeals pro se the district court’s order denying him leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) in his action alleging violation of his civil rights. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , we review for an abuse of discretion, O’Loughlin v. Doe, 920 F.2d 614, 616 (9th Cir.1990), and we vacate and remand.
The district court denied Negrete’s motion to proceed IFP on the ground that he made an “inadequate showing of indigen-cy.” On its face, Negrete’s affidavit and declaration in support of his motion appear adequate to establish indigency. The court offered no explanation for its conclusion to the contrary. See Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 34 , 112 S.Ct. 1728 , 118 L.Ed.2d 340 (1992) (holding that it is appropriate for an appellate court reviewing an IFP dismissal to consider “whether the [district] court has provided a statement explaining the dismissal that facilitates ‘intelligent appellate review’ ”) (citation omitted); Couveau v. American Airlines, Inc., 218 F.3d 1078, 1081 (9th Cir.2000) (per curiam) (“Appellate review is a particularly difficult process when there is nothing to review.”).