Herta

Herta v. Wiblemo

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJanuary 5, 20233:22-cv-01679California1,382 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 MARIA HERTA, Case No. 22-cv-1679-BAS-BGS 11 Plaintiff, ORDER: 12 v. (1) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION TO PROCEED CRAIG WIBLEMO, CHRISSY IN FORMA PAUPERIS (ECF No. 5) HUNSAKER, SHARNITA MOORE, (2) DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH Defendants. PREJUDICE (ECF No. 1)

On October 27, 2022, Plaintiff Maria Herta, proceeding pro se, commenced this action. (ECF No. 1.) The same day, Plaintiff also filed an application seeking leave to proceed without prepaying fees or costs, also known as proceeding in forma pauperis (“IFP”). (ECF No. 2.) The Court denied Plaintiff’s first IFP application without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to adequately fill out the IFP application form. (ECF No. 4.) For the reasons discussed below, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s second application to proceed IFP (ECF No. 5) and DISMISSES the Complaint with prejudice. I. IFP Application Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, an…

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.