United States District Court, D. Kansas
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
P. O'HARA U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
se plaintiff, Kristin Shepherd, filed this
employment-discrimination action against her former employer,
Riverside Transport Inc. She has moved to proceed with this
action in forma pauperis (ECF No. 3). The
undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge, James P. O'Hara,
respectfully recommends that the motion be denied.
1915 of Title 28 of the United States Code allows the court
to authorize the commencement of a civil action
“without prepayment of fees or security therefor, by a
person who submits an affidavit that . . . the person is
unable to pay such fees or give security
therefor.” To succeed on a motion to proceed in
forma pauperis, the movant must show a financial
inability to pay the required filing fees. “One need
not be ‘absolutely destitute' to proceed [in
forma pauperis], but [in forma pauperis] need
not be granted where one can pay or give security for the
costs ‘and still be able to provide [her]self and
dependents with the necessities of
life.'” “Proceeding in forma
pauperis in a civil case ‘is a privilege, not a
right -fundamental or otherwise.'” The decision to
grant or deny in forma pauperis status under'
1915 lies within the “wide discretion” of the
affidavit of financial status indicates that although her
income is “not large, it allow[s] her some
discretionary spending money.” Plaintiff is employed and
earns a net income of approximately $2, 800 a month.
Additionally, in the last 12 months, plaintiff and/or her
spouse have collected $19, 866 in unemployment and Social
Security benefits. Plaintiff reports having cash on hand in
the amount of $1, 500. Plaintiff's monthly expenses are
not excessive, totaling about $2, 056.
on this information, the undersigned concludes that plaintiff
has sufficient financial resources to pay the court's
filing fees. Accordingly, pursuant to Lister v. Dept. of
Treasury,  the undersigned hereby issues this report
and recommendation to the presiding U.S. District Judge,
Carlos Murguia, that plaintiff's motion to proceed in
forma pauperis be denied and that plaintiff be permitted
to pay the requisite filing fee in three equal monthly
installments. If plaintiff does not pay the fee, the
undersigned recommends that this case be dismissed without
is hereby informed that, within 14 days after she is served
with a copy of this report and recommendation, she may,
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72,
file written objections to the report and recommendation.
Plaintiff must file any objections within the 14-day period
allowed if she wants to have appellate review of the proposed
findings of fact, conclusions of law, or the recommended
disposition. If plaintiff does not timely file her
objections, no court will allow appellate review.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).
Lister v. Dept. of Treasury,
408 F.3d 1309, 1312 (10th Cir. 2005); United States v.
Garcia, 164 Fed. App'x 785, 786 n.1 (10th Cir. Jan.
Lewis v. Center Market, 378
Fed.Appx. 780, 785 (10th Cir. 2010) (quoting Adkins v.
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339
Green v. Suthers, No. 99-1447,
208 F.3d 226 (table), 2000 WL 309268, at *2 (10th Cir. Mar.
27, 2000) (quoting White v. Colo., 157 F.3d 1226,
1233 (10th Cir. 1998)).
Garcia, 164 Fed. App'x at
786 n.1. See also Lister, 408 F.3d at 1312
(“[W]e review the district court's denial of IFP
status for an ...