Trenton
Trenton v. Carmax, Inc
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSEPH AMAZIAH TRENTON, Case No.: 21-CV-1993-CAB-MSB
Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING APPLICATION
v. FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN
FORMA PAUPERIS
CARMAX, INC. et al., [Doc. No. 2] Defendants. 16 On November 26, 2021, Plaintiff, a non-prisoner appearing pro se, filed a complaint alleging that on September 14, 2021, Defendants refused to let Plaintiff leave after he attempted to deliver an automobile to a Carmax location in Escondido, California. Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee and instead applied to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). For the following reasons, the application to proceed IFP is denied. Generally, all parties instituting a civil action in this court must pay a filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); CivLR 4.5(a). However, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the court may authorize the commencement, prosecution or defense of any suit without payment of fees if the plaintiff submits an…