Finnegan
Finnegan v. Regus Management Group
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SEAN MATTHEW FINNEGAN, Case No.: 3:21-cv-0606-JLS-NLS Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT
vs. PREJUDICE MOTION TO
PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
REGUS MANAGEMENT GROUP, Defendant. (ECF No. 2) 16 17 Plaintiff Sean Matthew Finnegan, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against Regus Management Group on April 7, 2021 along with a request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). See “Compl.,” ECF No. 1; “IFP Mot.,” ECF No. 2. For the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP with leave to pay the filing fee. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the Court may authorize a plaintiff to pursue a case without payment of the filing fee. Whether an affiant has satisfied § 1915(a) falls within “the reviewing court[’s] . . . sound discretion.” California Men’s Colony v. Rowland, 939 F.2d 854, 858 (9th Cir. 1991), rev’d on other grounds, 506 U.S. 194 (1993). A party need not “be…