Finnegan

Finnegan v. US Bank

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaApril 28, 20213:21-cv-00620California1,549 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SEAN MATTHEW FINNEGAN, Case No.: 21-cv-0620-GPC-BLM

Plaintiff,

ORDER:

v. (1) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S US BANK,

MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA

Defendant. PAUPERIS; AND

16 (2) SUA SPONTE DISMISSING COMPLAINT

18 [ECF Nos. 1, 2] 19 Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a Complaint and subsequently filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP Motion”). ECF Nos. 1, 2. The Court DENIES Plaintiff’s IFP Motion and sua sponte DISMISSES the Complaint. PLAINTIFF’S IFP MOTION All parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in a district court of the United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of $402. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) (discussing the $350 statutory fee and $52 administrative 27 fee). The action may proceed despite this requirement only if the plaintiff is granted IFP status pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Andrews…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.