Simmons
Simmons v. Saul
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROLAND LEE S., Case No.: 3:20-cv-01068-AHG Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO
PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
v.
ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner of [ECF No. 3] Social Security, 15 Defendant.
17 On June 11, 2020, Plaintiff filed a Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking 18 judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s final decision denying Plaintiff’s 19 application for supplemental security income. ECF No. 1. Along with the Complaint, 20 Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). ECF No. 3.
I. LEGAL STANDARD
22 A motion to proceed IFP presents two issues for the Court’s consideration. First, the 23 Court must determine whether the applicant has properly shown an inability to pay the 24 $400 filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 25 (9th Cir. 1999). To that end, each applicant seeking to proceed IFP must provide the Court 26 a signed affidavit including a statement of all the applicant’s assets.…